
V** .*^K^ X/ .vsMfc 



/ 



DR. SHEDD'S WORKS. 



Dogmatic Theology. 

Two vols., 8vo, $7,00 

A History of Christian Doctrine. 

Two vols., crown 8vo. Seventh Edition, • • ■ 5.00 

Homiletics and Pastoral Theology. 

Crown 8vo. Ninth Edition, . • • • • 2.50 

Literary Essays (with Portrait). 

Crown 8vo. Revised Edition, • • • • • 2.50 

Theological Essays. 

Crown 8vo. Revised Edition, . • • • • 2.50 

Commentary on Romans. 

Crown 8vo, 2.50 

Sermons to the Natural Man. 

Crown 8vo. Third Edition, . • • • • 2.50 

Sermons to the Spiritual Man. 

Crown 8vo, i ■ 2.50 

The Doctrine of Endless ^Punishment.* ' • *• 

Crown 8vo, . . " . **? < . * . , L50 



THE 




PROPOSED REVISION 

OF THE 

WESTMINSTER STANDARDS 




NEW YORK 
CHAELES SCKIBNER'S SONS 
1890 




Copyright, 1890, by 
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 



TROWS 

PRINTING AND BOOKBINDING COMPANY, 
NEW YORK. 



PREFACE. 



The distinction between doctrines and persons, projects 
and their advocates, is a valid one. One may have little 
or no confidence in a doctrine or a project, and yet have 
confidence in an advocate of it, because a person may be 
different in his spirit and intention from the nature and 
tendency of his doctrine, while his doctrine is a fixed 
quantity. Coleridge, in a conversation with a Unitarian 
friend said : " I make the greatest difference between ans 
and isms. I should deal insincerely with you, if I said 
that I thought Unitarianism is Christianity ; but God 
forbid that I should doubt that you and many other 
Unitarians are in a practical sense very good Christians." 
(Table Talk, April 4, 1832.) This distinction is impor- 
tant in the present controversy. When the opponent of 
revision asserts that revision is anti-Calvinistic in its logic 
and tendency, he does not assert that all of its advocates 
are anti-Calvinists. The writer of these papers believes 
that the natural and inevitable effect of the proposed 
changes in the Confession, will be more or less to weaken 
and break down the Calvinistic system contained in it, 
and endeavors to prove it ; but he does not believe or say 
that this is the desire or intention of many who urge 
them. 

The spirit of revision, which it is so often said is " in 
the air," is pervading Pan-Presbyterianism. If it pre- 



iv 



PREFACE. 



vails, there can be little doubt that the historical Calvin- 
ism of the past will be considerably modified ; and doc- 
trinal modification is an inclined plane. In a materialistic 
age, when the Calvinistic type of doctrine is vehemently 
opposed, the Presbyterian Church should not modify the 
creed from which it has derived its past solidarity and 
power, but should reaffirm it ; and non-revision is reaf- 
firmation. 

New York, February 22, 1890. 



CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

Inexpediency op the Revision op the Westminster Con- 
fession, 1 

Objections to the Revision of the Westminster Con- 
fession, .13 

Are there Doctrinal Errors in the Westminster Con- 
fession ? 18 

The Westminster Standards and the Universal Offer 
of Mercy, 24 

The Meaning and Value of the Doctrine of Decrees, . 30 

What is the Sovereignty of God in Election ? . . .72 

The Westminster Standards and the "Larger Hope," . 78 



THE PROPOSED REVISION 

OP THE 

WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



i. 

INEXPEDIENCY OF THE REVISION OF THE WESTMINSTER 
CONFESSION. 1 

The question whether the Westminster Confession 
shall be revised, has been referred to the whole Church 
represented by the presbyteries. The common sentiment 
of the denomination must determine the matter. The 
expression of opinion during the few months prior to the 
presbyterial action is, therefore, of consequence. It is 
desirable that it should be a full expression of all varieties 
of views, and as a contribution towards it, we purpose 
to assign some reasons why the revision of the Confession 
is not expedient. 

1. In the first place it is inexpedient, because in its ex- 
isting form as drawn up by the Westminster Assembly it 
has met, and well met, all the needs of the Church for the 
past two centuries. The Presbyterian Church in the 
United States since 1700 has passed through a varied and 
sometimes difficult experience. . The controversies in the 



1 New York Evangelist, September 5, 1889. 



2 



THE PKOPOSED EEVISION OF 



beginning between the Old and New Lights, and still 
more the vehement disputes that resulted in the division 
of the Church in 1837, have tried the common symbol as 
severely as it is ever likely to be. But through them all 
both theological divisions were content with the Confes- 
sion and Catechisms as they stood, and both alike claimed 
to be true to them. Neither party demanded a revision 
on any doctrinal points ; and both alike found in them a 
satisfactory expression of their faith. "What is there in 
the Presbyterian Church of to-day that necessitates any 
different statement of the doctrine of decrees, of atone- 
ment, of regeneration, or of punishment, from that ac- 
cepted by the Presbyterian Church of 1837, or 1789 ? Are 
the statements upon these points any more liable to mis- 
conception or misrepresentation by non-Calvinists now 
than they were fifty or a hundred years ago ? Are there 
any more "weak consciences" requiring softening expla- 
nations and relaxing clauses in the Church of to-day than 
in former periods ? And with reference to the allowable 
differences of theological opinion within the Presbyterian 
Church, is not a creed that was adopted and defended by 
Charles Hodge and Albert Barnes sufficiently broad to 
include all who are really Calvinistic and Presbyterian in 
belief ? What is there, we repeat, in the condition of the 
Presbyterian Church of to-day that makes the old Con- 
fession of the past two hundred years inadequate as a doc- 
trinal Standard ? All the past successes and victories of 
Presbyterianism have been accomplished under it. Suc- 
cess in the past is guaranty for success in the future. Is 
it not better for the Church to work on the very same old 
base, in the very same straight line ? 

2. Revision is inexpedient, because the reunion of the 
two divisions of the Church was founded upon the Con- 
fession as it now stands. A proposition to unite the two 



t 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



3 



branches of Presbyterianism by first revising the West- 
minster documents would have failed, because in the revi- 
sion individual and party preferences would have shown 
themselves. But when the Standards pure and simple 
were laid down as the only terms of union, the whole mass 
of Presbyterians flowed together. It is to be feared that if 
a revision of the Confession should take place, there will be 
a dissatisfied portion of the Church who will prefer to re- 
main upon the historic foundation ; that the existing har- 
mony will be disturbed ; and that the proposed measures 
for union with other Presbyterian bodies will fall through. 

3. Revision is inexpedient, because it will introduce 
new difficulties. The explanations will need to be ex- 
plained. The revision that is called for is said by its 
more conservative advocates, not to be an alteration of 
the doctrine of the Confession, but an explanation only. 
Now good and sufficient explanations of a creed require 
more space than can be afforded in a concise symbol in- 
tended for use in inducting officers and members. Such 
full and careful explanations have been made all along 
from the beginning, and the Presbyterian Board of Pub- 
lication has issued a large and valuable library of them. 
No one need be in any doubt respecting the meaning of 
the Confession who will carefully peruse one or more of 
them. He who is not satisfied with the Westminster doc- 
trine as so explained, will not be satisfied with it at all. 
But if brief explanations are inserted into the Confession 
itself, their brevity will inevitably expose them to mis- 
understanding and misconception. Take an illustration. 
An able minister and divine, whose Calvinism is unim- 
peachable, suggests that Confession iii. 3 shall read : 
" By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his 
glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto ever- 
lasting life, and others foreordained [for their sins] to 

t 



4 



THE PKOPOSED EEVISION OF 



everlasting death." If the clause in brackets is inserted 
without further explanation, the article might fairly and 
naturally be understood to teach that the reason why God 
passes by a sinner in the bestowment of regenerating 
grace is the sinner's sin. But St. Paul expressly says that 
the sinner's sin is not the cause of his non-election to re- 
generation. " The children being not yet born, neither 
having done any good or evil, it was said, The elder 
shall serve the younger. Esau have I hated" (Rom. 9: 
11-13). The reason for the difference between the elect 
and non-elect is not the holiness or the sin of either of 
them, but God's sovereign good pleasure. " He hath 
mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will 
he hardeneth" (Horn. 9 : 18). An explanation like this, 
without further explanation such as the proposer would 
undoubtedly make, would not only contradict Scripture, 
but change the Calvinistic doctrine into the Arminian. 
The reason for non-election would no longer be secret and 
sovereign, but known and conditional. All this liability 
to misconstruction is avoided by the Confession itself as 
it now stands. For in Confession iii. 7, after saying that 
the " passing by " in the bestowment of regenerating 
grace is an act of God's sovereign pleasure, " whereby he 
extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth," it then 
adds that "the ordaining to dishonor and wrath" is "for 
sin." Sin is here represented as the reason for the judi- 
cial act of punishing, but not for the sovereign act of not 
regenerating. The only reason for the latter, our Lord 
gives in his, " Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in 
thy sight." 

Other illustrations might be given of the difficulty of 
avoiding misconception when a systematic creed is sought 
to be explained, particularly in its difficult points, by the 
brief interpolation of words and clauses. The method is 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



5 



too short. More space is required than can be spared. 
It is better, therefore, to let a carefully constructed and 
concisely phrased creed like the Westminster stand ex- 
actly as it was drawn up by the sixty-nine commissioners, 
in the five weekly sessions for nearly nine years, and have 
it explained, qualified, and defended in published trea- 
tises, in sermons, and especially in catechetical lectures. 
Had the ministry been as faithful as it should in years 
past in catechetical instruction, there would be little dif- 
ficulty in understanding the Westminster creed. The 
remedy needed is in this direction, not in that of a re- 
vision . 

4. Revision is inexpedient, because there is no end to 
the process. It is like the letting out of water. The doc- 
trine of the divine decrees is the particular one selected 
by the presbytery whose request has brought the subject 
of revision before the General Assembly. But this doc- 
trine runs entirely through the Westminster documents, 
so that if changes were made merely in the third chapter 
of the Confession, it would be wholly out of harmony 
with the remainder. Effectual calling, regeneration, per- 
severance of the saints, are all linked in with the divine 
decree. The most cursory perusal will show that a revi- 
sion of the Confession on this one subject would amount 
to an entire recasting of the creed. 

5. Revision is inexpedient, because it may abridge the 
liberty of interpretation now afforded by the Confession. 
As an example of the variety in explanation admitted by 
the creed as it now stands, take the statement that " God 
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in the beginning, 
created or made from nothing the world, and all things 
therein, in the space of six days." He who holds the 
patristic view that the days of Genesis were periods, and 
he who holds the modern opinion that the days were 



6 



THE PEOPOSED REVISION OP 



solar, can subscribe to the Westminster statement. But 
if revised in the interest of either view, the subscriber is 
shut up to it alone. Another example is found in the 
statement respecting the guilt of Adam's sin. The advo- 
cate of natural union, or of representative union, or of 
both in combination, can find a foothold, provided only 
that he holds to the penal nature of the first sin. An- 
other instance is the article concerning "elect infants." 
As the tenet was formulated by the Assembly, it has 
been understood to mean, (a) that all infants dying in 
infancy are elected as a class, some being saved by cov- 
enanted mercy, and some by uncovenanted mercy ; (b) 
that all infants dying in infancy are elected as a class — all 
alike, those within the Church and those outside of it, 
being saved by divine mercy, nothing being said of the 
covenant ; (c) that dying infants are elected as individ- 
uals, some being elect, and some non-elect. Probably 
each of these opinions had its representatives in the 
Assembly, and hence the indefinite form of the state- 
ment. The writer regards the first-mentioned view as 
best supported by Scripture and the analogy of faith; 
but there are many who advocate the second view, and 
perhaps there may be some who hold the third. The 
liberty of opinion now conceded by the Confession on a 
subject respecting which the Scripture data are few, 
would be ill-exchanged for a statement that would admit 
of but one interpretation. 

6. Revision is inexpedient, because the Westminster 
Confession, as it now reads, is a sufficiently broad and 
liberal creed. We do not say that it is sufficiently broad 
and liberal for every man and every denomination ; but 
it is as broad and liberal for a Calvinist as any Calvinist 
should desire. For whoever professes Calvinism, professes 
a precise form of doctrine. He expects to keep within 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



7 



definite metes and bounds ; he is not one of those religion- 
ists who start from no premises, and come to no con- 
clusions, and hold no tenets. The Presbyterian Church 
is a Calvinistic Church. It will be the beginning of its 
decline, as it already has been of some Calvinistic denom- 
inations, when it begins to swerve from this dogmatic 
position. It must therefore be distinguished among the 
Churches for doctrinal consistency, comprehensiveness, 
and firmness. But inside of the metes and bounds es- 
tablished by divine revelation, and to which it has vol- 
untarily confined itself, it has a liberty that is as large 
as the kingdom of God. It cannot get outside of that 
kingdom, and should not desire to. But within it, it is 
as free to career as a ship in the ocean, as an eagle in the 
air. Yet the ship cannot sail beyond the ocean, nor the 
eagle fly beyond the sky. Liberty within the immeasura- 
ble bounds and limits of God's truth, is the only true 
liberty. All else is license. The Westminster Con- 
fession, exactly as it now reads, has been the creed of as 
free and enlarged intellects as ever Jived on earth. The 
substance of it was the strong; and fertile root of the two 
freest movements in modern history : that of the Protes- 
tant Reformation and that of Republican Government. 
No Presbyterian should complain that the creed of his 
Church is narrow and stifling. 

And here we notice an objection urged against the 
Confession relative to the tenet of limited redemption. 
It is said that it is not sufficiently broad and liberal in 
announcing the boundless compassion of God towards all 
men indiscriminately, and in inviting all men without 
exception to cast themselves upon it. But read and 
ponder the following statements : 

"Repentance unto life is an evangelical grace, the doc- 
trine whereof is to be preached in season and out of 



8 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



season by every minister of the gospel, as well as that 
of faith in Christ. It is every man's duty to endeavor to 
repent of his particular sins, particularly. Every man is 
bound to make private confession of his sins to God, 
praying for the pardon thereof, upon which, and the 
forsaking of them, he shall find mercy. Prayer, with 
thanksgiving, being one special part of religious worship, 
is by God required of all men. Prayer is to be made for 
all sorts of men living, or that shall live hereafter, but not 
for the dead. God is to be worshipped everywhere in 
spirit and in truth, and in secret each one by himself. 
God in his Word, by a positive moral commandment, binds 
all men in all ages. The grace of God is manifested in the 
second covenant, in that he freely provideth and offer- 
eth to sinners a mediator, and life and salvation in him. 
The ministry of the gospel testifies that whosoever be- 
lieves in Christ shall be saved, and excludes none that 
will come unto him. God is able to search the heart, 
hear the requests, pardon the sins, and fulfil the desires, 
of all." 

These declarations, scattered broadcast through the 
Westminster Confession and Catechisms, teach the uni- 
versality of the Gospel, except no human creature from 
the offer of it, and exclude no human creature from its 
benefits. Their consistency with the doctrine of election 
is assumed, but not explained, in the Confession of Faith. 
And no revision of this by the mere interpolation of a few 
words or clauses, will make the subject any clearer, or 
stop all objections. 

7. Revision is inexpedient, because the Westminster 
Standards already make full provision for those ex- 
ceptional cases, on account of which revision is claimed 
by its advocates to be needed. It is said that there are 
some true believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, who cannot 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



9 



adopt all the Westminster statements, who yet should not 
be, and actually are not, excluded from the Presbyterian 
Church ; that there are tender consciences of good men, 
whose scruples are to be respected. But these cases are 
referred by the Form of Government to the church 
session, and power is given to it to receive into member- 
ship any person who trusts in the blood of Christ for the 
remission of sin, although his doctrinal knowledge and 
belief may be unsatisfactory on some points. He may 
stumble at predestination, but if with the publican he 
cries " God be merciful to me a sinner," he has the root 
of the matter in him, and is a regenerate child of God. 
But why should the whole Presbyterian Church revise its 
entire creed, so as to make it fit these exceptional cases ? 
Why should the mountain go to Mohammed ? Why 
should a genuine but deficient evangelical knowledge and 
experience be set up as the type of doctrine for the whole 
denomination? These " babes in Christ" need the educa- 
tion of the full and complete system of truth, and should 
gradually be led up to it, instead of bringing the system 
down to their level. There is sometimes a misconception 
at this point. We have seen it stated that the member- 
ship of the Presbyterian Church is not required or ex- 
pected to hold the same doctrine with the officers ; that 
the pastor, elders, and deacons must accept the Confession 
of Faith " as containing the system of doctrine taught in 
the Holy Scriptures," but that the congregation need not. 
But this error arises from confounding the toleration of a 
deficiency with the endorsement of it. Because a church 
session tolerates in a particular person, w T ho gives evidence 
of faith in Christ, an error respecting foreordination, or 
even some abstruse point in the trinity, or the incarna- 
tion, it does not thereby endorse the error. It does not 
sanction his opinion on these subjects, but only endures 



10 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



it, in view of his religious experience on the vital points 
of faith and repentance, and with the hope that his sub- 
sequent growth in knowledge will bring him to the final 
rejection of it. The Presbyterian Church tolerates thea- 
tre-going in some of its members : that is to say, it does 
not discipline them for it. But it does not formally 
approve of and sanction theatre-going. A proposition to 
revise the Confession by inserting a clause to this effect, 
in order to meet the wishes and practice of theatre-go- 
ing church-members, would be voted down by the pres- 
byteries. 

The position that the officers of a church may have one 
creed, and the membership another, is untenable. !Nb 
church could live and thrive upon it. A Trinitarian 
clergy preaching to an Arian or Socinian membership, 
w r ould preach to unwilling hearers. And although the 
difference is not so great and so vital, yet a Calvinistic 
clergy preaching to an Arminian membership, or an 
Arminian clergy to a Calvinistic membership, would on 
some points find unsympathetic auditors. Pastor and 
people, officers and members, must be homogeneous in 
doctrine, in order to a vigorous church-life. If, there- 
fore, a certain class of members is received into a church, 
who do not on all points agree with the Church creed, 
this is not to be understood as giving the members gener- 
ally a liberty to depart from the Church creed, or to be a 
reason for revising it. 1 

The case is different with the officers of the church. 



1 The question whether there shall be a short creed to be used in the 
admission of members into the Church, is entirely distinct from that 
of revision. Such a creed ought not, of course, to contain anything 
contradictory to the larger creed which makes a part of the constitution 
of the Church, and is used in the induction of ministers, elders, and 
theological professors. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



11 



There is no exceptional class in this instance. Neither 
the session nor the presbytery have any authority to dis- 
pense with the acceptance of any part of the Confession 
of Faith, when a pastor, elder, or deacon is inducted into 
office. There is no toleration of defective views provided 
for, when those who are to teach and rule the Church are 
put into the ministry. And this for the good reason that 
ministers and elders are expected to be so well indoctrin- 
ated, that they are " apt to teach " and competent to 
"rule well." Some propose "loose subscription" as a 
remedy, when candidates of lax or unsettled views present 
themselves for licensure and ordination. This is demor- 
alizing, and kills all simplicity and godly sincerity. Bet- 
ter a thousand times for a denomination to alter its creed, 
than to allow its ministry to "palter with words in a 
double meaning ; " than to permit an Arian subscription 
to the Eocene Symbol, an Arminian subscription to the 
Westminster Confession, a Calvinistic subscription to 
the Articles of Wesley, a Restorationist subscription to 
the doctrine of endless punishment. 

For these reasons, it seems to us that the proposed re- 
vision of the Westminster Confession is not wise or ex- 
pedient. The revision of a denominational creed is a rare 
occurrence in ecclesiastical history. Commonly a denom- 
ination remains from first to last upon the base that was 
laid for it in the beginning by its fathers and founders. 
And when revision does occur, it is seldom in the direc- 
tion of fulness and precision. Usually the alteration is 
in favor of vague and looser statements. Even slight 
changes are apt to be followed by greater ones. The dis- 
position to revise and alter, needs watching. In an age 
when the general drift of the unregenerate world is away 
from the strong statements of the Hebrew prophets, of 
Christ and his inspired Apostles, it is of the utmost im- 



12 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



portance that the regenerate Church, in all its denomina- 
tions, should stand firm in the old paths, and hold fast to 
that " Word of God which is sharper than a two-edged 
sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and 
spirit." 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



13 



II. 

OBJECTIONS TO THE REVISION OF THE WESTMINSTER 
CONFESSION. 1 

The first question sent down to the presbyteries is the 
most important of the two ; namely, Whether a revision of 
the Confession is desired. If this is answered in the nes;- 
ative, it will mean that the Presbyterian Church of the 
present day is satisfied with its ancestral faith, as formu- 
lated in its Standards, and accords with the Church of the 
past in this respect. It will be a formal and positive re- 
affirmation of the historic Calvinism, at a time when this 
system of doctrine is charged with being unscriptural, er- 
roneous, and antiquated by modern theological progress. 
If it be answered in the affirmative, it will mean that the 
Church of the present day is more or less dissatisfied with 
the doctrines of the Westminster Assembly, and is no 
longer willing to endorse and preach them as that body of 
divines defined and stated them. Revision is alteration^ 
more or less. The object is not merely to make sure that 
the creed just as it stands is understood; but to modify it 
either in its structural plan, its component parts, its em- 
phasis, or its general perspective. The second question, 
How much revision is desired ? is comparatively of less 
consequence, because it is the first question alone that 
decides the vital point, whether the Presbyterian Church 

1 New York Presbytery, November 20, 1889 ; Northwestern Presby- 
terian, November 23, 1889. 



14 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



lias drifted at all from the old anchorage. For this rea- 
son, we present in a brief form the following objections 
to the revision of the Westminster Confession : 

1. Revision is objectionable, because the project origin- 
ated in too small a fraction of the Church. Only fifteen 
presbyteries out of two hundred and two united in over- 
timing the Assembly in its favor. The remaining one 
hundred and eighty-seven will have to be argued and per- 
suaded into it. But so important a step as the revision of 
the doctrinal basis of a denomination should begin in a 
general uprising of the whole body, and be the spontane- 
ous and strongly expressed desire of the great majority of 
its members. The revision of secondary matters, like the 
form of government and discipline, does not require this 
in the same degree. As the case now stands, fifteen 
presbyteries have asked one hundred and eighty-seven 
presbyteries if they do not want to amend the Confes- 
sion. There should have been a far wider dissatisfac- 
tion with the Standards than this indicates, to initiate re- 
vision. 

2. Revision is objectionable, because the Confession is a 
correct statement of " the system of doctrine contained in 
the Scriptures." The system meant in this phrase is uni- 
versally known as the Calvinistic ; not as resting upon the 
authority of Calvin, but as a convenient designation of 
that interpretation of Scripture which is common to Au- 
gustine, Calvin, the Reformed theologians, and the West- 
minster divines. The term "evangelical" does not define 
it, because there are several evangelical systems, but only 
one Calvinistic. The systems of Arminius, of Wesley, 
and of the Later-Lutherans, as well as that of Calvin, are 
alike evangelical, in distinction from anti-evangelical sys- 
tems like Socinianism and Deism. They are all alike 
derived from the Bible, and contain the doctrines of the 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



15 



trinity, the incarnation, the apostasy, and the redemption. 
But the Calvinistic interpretation of Scripture, which is 
the one formulated in the W estminster Standards, differs 
from these other "evangelical" systems, in teaching un- 
conditional election and pretention, instead of conditional ; 
limited redemption (not atonement) instead of unlimited; 
regeneration wholly by the Holy Spirit instead of partly ; 
the total inability of the sinner instead of partial. The 
Calvinistic system, as thus discriminated from the other 
" evangelical " systems, has been adopted by American 
Presbyterians for two centuries. Neither Old Lights, nor 
Is ew Lights ; neither Old School, nor ~New School ; have 
demanded that these tenets which distinguish Calvinism 
from Arminianism should be eliminated from the creed. 
They were accepted with equal sincerity by both branches 
of the Church in the reunion of 1870, and there is no rea- 
son for altering the formulas that were satisfactory then, 
unless the belief of the Church has altered in regard to 
these distinctive points of Calvinism. 

3. The revision of the Confession is objectionable, be- 
cause the principal amendments proposed by its advocates 
will introduce error into it, so that it will no longer be 
" the system of doctrine contained in the Scriptures." 
The four following alterations are urged upon the Church : 
(a) To strike out the doctrine of the sovereignty of God 
in pretention, leaving the doctrine of election unlimited 
and universal, (b) To retain pretention, but assign as 
the reason for it the sin of the non-elect, (c) To strike 
out the statement that the number of the elect and non- 
elect is "so certain and definite, that it cannot be increased 
or diminished" by "angels and men." (d) To strike out 
the statement that no man who rejects the " Christian re- 
ligion," or the evangelical method of salvation, can be 
saved by the legal method of living " according to the 



16 



THE PEOPOSED EEVISION OF 



light of nature," or some system of morality which he 
" professes." If these changes are made, the Westminster 
Standards will no longer contain a class of truths that are 
plainly taught in Scripture, and will cease to be that " sys- 
tem of doctrine " which these authors had in mind, and to 
which the present generation of ministers and elders have 
subscribed like their fathers before them. 

4. Revision is objectionable, because it will be a conces- 
sion to the enemies of the Standards that their aspersions 
of them are true. The charges that have been made by 
the opponents of them from time immemorial are, that 
Calvinism represents God as a tyrannical sovereign who 
is destitute of love and mercy for any but an elect few, 
that it attributes to man the depravity of devils, deprives 
him of moral freedom, and subjects him to the arbitrary 
cruelty of a Being who creates some men in order to damn 
them. A few ministers and elders within the Presbyte- 
rian Church endorse these allegations ; and many assert 
that the Confession contains no universal offer of salva- 
tion, teaches that none of the heathen are saved, and that 
some infants are non-elect and lost. The great reason 
assigned by such Presbyterians for revising the Standards 
is, that they inculcate unscriptural and offensive doctrines 
that cannot be believed or preached. But this is to con- 
cede that all preceding Presbyterians have been grossly 
mistaken in denying that the Confession contains such 
doctrines, either directly or by implication. It is an 
acknowledgment that one of the most carefully drawn 
and important of all the Reformed symbols, inculcates in 
a latent form some of the most repulsive tenets conceiv- 
able by the human mind. Presbyterians of all schools 
have hitherto met this calumny on their creed by contra- 
dicting it, and trying the issue by close reasoning and de- 
bate. Revision proposes, in the legal phrase, to give a 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



17 



cognovit, admit the charge, and alter the standards to suit 
the enemy who made it. 

5. Revision is objectionable, because it will reopen the 
old discussions and controversies upon the difficult doc- 
trines, without resulting in any better definitions of them 
than they already have in the Church. On the contrary, 
the great variety of changes that will be urged, from the 
very conservative to the very radical, will introduce a pe- 
riod of speculative dispute and disagreement that will 
seriously impair the existing harmony of the denomina- 
tion, and divert its attention from the great practical in- 
terests of Christ's kingdom in which it is now engaged. 

These five objections, it seems to us, are conclusive 
reasons why the Presbyterian Church should not alter, 
but reaffirm the doctrines of the Westminster Standards, 
and continue to teach and defend them as they have been 
by all the past generations of Presbyterians. 
2 



18 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OE 



III. 

ARE THERE DOCTRINAL ERRORS IN THE WESTMINSTER 

CONFESSION ? 1 

The strongest reason presented for the revision of the 
Westminster Confession is the allegation that the phrase- 
ology of some of its sections contains serious error, or is 
liable to be understood as containing it. Is this true ? 
In order to answer this question, we shall examine a few 
of the principal sections which are asserted to be errone- 
ous either in their direct teaching or in their implication. 

1. Confession iii. 3 asserts that " By the decree of God, 
for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels 
are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others fore- 
ordained to everlasting death." It is contended that this 
section teaches, or is liable to be understood as teaching, 
that the decree of God in election and reprobation has no 
connection with sin and the fall of man, but that God by 
an arbitrary decree, wholly irrespective of sin, creates 
some men in order to save them, and some men in order 
to damn them. To correct this alleged error, or liability 
of interpretation, several advocates of revision propose to 
insert the clause, " On account of their sins," to qualify 
the clause, " Foreordained to everlasting death ; " and 
one advocate of revision proposes to strike out the entire 
section concerning election and reprobation. 

We maintain that the Confession neither teaches the 



1 Philadelphia Presbyterian, October 19, 1889. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



19 



error aforesaid, nor is fairly liable to be understood to 
teach it. According to Confession iii. 6, both the elect 
and non-elect are " fallen in Adam," and are thereby in a 
common guilty state of sin. The former are delivered 
out of sin by regenerating grace, and the latter are left in 
sin. Why are the latter left in sin ? Because " God so 
pleased," is the reason given by the Confession. " On 
account of their sins," is the reason which the reviser 
would insert into the Confession. But this, surely, can- 
not be the reason why God leaves a sinner in his sin. I 
see two suicides who have flung themselves into the 
water. I rescue one of them, and the other I let drown. 
They are both alike in the water, and by their own free 
agency. But his being in the water, is not the reason 
why I do not rescue the one whom I let drown. I have 
some other reason. It may be a good one or a bad one. 
But whatever it be, it certainly is not because the man is 
in the water. Similarly God does not leave a sinner in his 
own voluntary and loved sin because he is in sin. He 
has some other reason why he makes this discrimination 
between two persons, both of whom are in sin, neither of 
whom has any claim upon his mercy, and neither of 
whom is more deserving of election and regeneration than 
the other. God's reason, in this case, we know must be 
a good one. But it is a secret with himself. The only 
answer to the inquiry, ""Why didst thou elect and regen- 
erate Saul of Tarsus, and didst not elect and regenerate 
Judas Iscariot ? " is, " Because it seemed good in my 
sight." 

The allegation that there is error in this section of the 
Confession arises from misunderstanding the meaning of 
the clause, "Foreordained to everlasting death." It is 
the omission to regenerate, not the punishment of sin, that 
is intended by it. When God " foreordains " a sinner 



20 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OE 



" to everlasting death," lie decides to leave him in the sin 
which deserves everlasting death and results in it. The 
non-elect sinner has experienced the operation of common 
grace. It is an error to say that God shows no kind or 
degree of mercy to the non-elect. But he has resisted 
and defeated it. God decides to proceed no further with 
him by the bestowment of that special grace which regen- 
erates, and " makes willing in the day of God's power." 
The elect sinner has also experienced, resisted, and de- 
feated common grace. God decides to proceed further 
with him, by effectual calling and regeneration. The par- 
ticular question, therefore, in this paragraph of the Con- 
fession is, " Why does God leave a sinner to his own wilful 
free agency ? " and not, " Why does God punish him for 
it?" The answer to the first question is, "Because of 
his sovereign good pleasure." The answer to the second 
is, " Because of the ill-desert of sin." The reason why 
God omits to take the second step, and exert a yet higher 
degree of grace after his first step in exerting a lower de- 
gree has been thwarted by the resistance of the sinner, is 
entirely different from the reason why he inflicts retribu- 
tion upon the sinner's sin. This is more fully explained 
in the seventh section of the third chapter, which should 
always be read in connection w T ith the third. Here, the 
reason for God's "passing by," or omitting to regenerate 
a sinner, is found in " the unsearchable counsel of his own 
will whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he 
pleaseth." This first negative part of reprobation, which 
is properly called " pretention," is not qualified by the 
clause, " for their sin," as the correct punctuation in the 
Board's edition shows. This latter clause qualifies only 
the sentence, " And to ordain them to dishonor and 
wrath." Sinners are punished " for their sin," but sin is 
not the reason why God does not regenerate them. If sin 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



21 



were the reason for non-election, holiness, logically, would 
be the reason for election. If some men are not regen- 
erated because they are unbelieving, others would be re- 
generated because they are believing. This is the Ar- 
minian doctrine, not the Calvinistic ; and this is the 
reason why the Westminster Assembly did not qualify the 
words, " pass by," by the proposed clause, " for their 
sins," but left " passing by," or " foreordination to ever- 
lasting death," to be a purely sovereign act according to 
" the good pleasure " of God. 

2. Confession iii. 4 teaches that " the angels and men 
thus predestinated and foreordained are particularly and 
unchangeably designed ; and their number is so certain 
and definite that it cannot be either increased or dimin- 
ished." One advocate of revision proposes that this 
whole section be struck out of the Standards, because it 
" is not a scriptural form of expression ; it is mislead- 
ing." 

What is the meaning of this section ? " Increased or 
diminished " by whom f What is the ellipsis intended to 
be supplied by the framers of the statement ? Plainly 
they meant that the number of the elect and non-elect 
cannot be increased or diminished by the "angels and 
men " spoken of in the connection : that is, by any finite 
power. Neither the human will, nor the angelic, can de- 
termine the number of God's elect and non-elect, because 
this depends wholly upon " the counsel of his own will." 
Of course, the Assembly did not mean to say that God 
could not have made the number of his elect larger or 
smaller, if " the counsel of his own will " had so deter- 
mined. Probably no advocate of revision understands 
the Confession to teach this. But will any advocate of it 
say that the number of the regenerate and saved can be 
made greater or less by the decision and action of either 



22 



THE PROPOSED PREVISION OF 



the unregenerate world, or the regenerate church ? This 
would contradict the statement of St. John, that the elect 
"sons of God are born not of blood, nor of the will of the 
flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." It would also 
contradict the corresponding statement in the Confession 
which teaches that " in effectual calling man is altogether 
passive, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy 
Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer the call, and to 
embrace the grace offered and conveyed by it " (Confession 
x. 2). This fourth section of the third chapter is simply 
another way of teaching the common doctrine, running 
all through the Standards, that the sinful will is in "bond- 
age to sin, and cannot regenerate itself, and that conse- 
quently the number of the regenerate depends wholly 
upon the will and decision of God. 

3. Confession x. 4 asserts that " men not professing the 
Christian religion cannot be saved in any other way what- 
soever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives ac- 
cording to the light of nature, and the law of that relig- 
ion they do profess." This is alleged to be erroneous 
by an advocate of revision, because " every promise and 
every warning of God is addressed to man as a free agent, 
and not as one who cannot be saved." 

Who are the persons " not professing the Christian re- 
ligion ? " They are those who reject it, either formally, 
or in their spirit and disposition. The class here spoken 
of are the legalists of every variety, who repudiate salva- 
tion through Christ's blood and righteousness, and rely 
upon "diligently framing their lives according to the light 
of nature, and the law of that religion which they do pro- 
fess" — which is some other than "the Christian religion," 
which they do not " profess," but contemn. The Chris- 
tian religion is evangelical religion, and this they dislike. 
They expect to be saved by morality and personal virtue, 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



23 



and not by faith in the vicarious atonement of Jesus 
Christ. 

The doctrine then, in this section is, in brief, that no 
man can be saved by good works ; by any endeavors how- 
ever " diligent " to obey the written law of the decalogue, 
as the Christian legalist does, or the unwritten law of 
conscience, as the heathen legalist does. Now concern- 
ing this class of persons St. Paul explicitly says that 
" they cannot be saved." " By the deeds of the law shall 
no flesh be justified." St. Peter says the same. "There 
is no other name under heaven given among men, where- 
by we must be saved." 

There is nothing in this section that denies the possi- 
bility of the salvation of any sinner on earth who feels 
his sin, and trusts in the sacrifice of Christ in case he 
has heard of it, or would trust in it if he should hear of 
it. It does not teach that no heathen is or can be saved. 
This fourth section, so often misunderstood and misrepre- 
sented, is aimed at the self-righteous moralist, whether in 
Christendom or Heathendom, who has no sorrow for sin, 
feels no need of God's mercy as manifested in Christ, and 
has no disposition to cast himself upon it, but claims the 
rewards of eternity on the ground of personal character 
and obedience to " the light of nature " and the maxims 
of morality. It is only a bold and strong assertion of 
the great truth, that no sinner can be saved by his most 
strenuous endeavors to keep the moral law. It is not 
strange, therefore, that this section closes with the affir- 
mation that " to assert and maintain the contrary is very 
pernicious and to be detested." 

If this is the correct explanation of these three sections 
of the Confession, it is evident that they neither teach 
nor imply error, and therefore do not need any revision. 



24 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



IY. 

THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS AND THE UNIVERSAL 
OFFER OF MERCY. 1 

The Westminster Standards are now meeting an attack 
from some who have adopted them as their religious 
creed. Formerly the onset came from the enemy on the 
outside, now it comes from within the Church. When so 
many presbyterians are objecting to the Confession as 
containing " offensive articles that wound the consciences 
of tens of thousands of loyal and orthodox presbyterians," 
it is proper for an ordinary presbyterian to say a good 
word for the time-honored symbol which has been sub- 
scribed by the present generation of ministers and elders, 
and was dear to all the former generations. May it not 
be that these " offensive articles " are not in the Stand- 
ards, and that the advocates of revision, in order to find a 
sufficient reason for their project, are inventing and fight- 
ing men of straw ? Let us look at one of these alleged 
offences. 

It is strenuously contended that the Standards contain 
no declaration of the love of God towards all men, but 
limit it to the elect ; that they make no universal offer of 
salvation, but confine it to a part of mankind. 

The following declaration is found in Confession ii. 1. 
" There is but one only living and true God, who is most 
loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in 



1 New York Observer, November 14, 1889. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 25 



goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression and 
sin, the rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Of 
whom speaketh the Confession this ? of the God of the 
elect only ? or of the God of every man ? Is he the God 
of the elect only ? Is he not also of the non-elect ? Is 
this description of the gracious nature and attributes of 
God intended to be restricted to a part of mankind ? Is 
not God as thus delineated the Creator and Father of 
every man without exception ? Can it be supposed that 
the authors of this statement meant to be understood to 
say that God is not such a being for all men, but only for 
some ? If this section does not teach the unlimited love 
and compassion of God towards all men as men, as his 
creatures, it teaches nothing. 

The following declaration is found in Confession xv. 1, 
Larger Catechism, 159. " Repentance unto life is an 
evangelical grace, the doctrine whereof is to be preached 
in season and out of season by every minister of the gos- 
pel, as well as that of faith in Christ." This certainly 
teaches that faith and repentance are the duty of all men, 
not of some only. ~No one contends that the Confession 
teaches that God has given a limited command to repent. 
u God commandeth all men everywhere to repent." But 
how could he give such a universal command to all sin- 
ners if he is not willing to pardon all sinners ? if his 
benevolent love is confined to some sinners in particular ? 
How could our Lord command his ministers to preach the 
doctrine of faith and repentance to " every creature," if 
he does not desire that every one of them would believe 
and repent ? And how can he desire this if he does not 
feel infinite love for the souls of all ? When the Confes- 
sion teaches the duty of universal faith and repentance, it 
teaches by necessary inference the doctrine of God's uni- 
versal compassion and readiness to forgive. And it also 



26 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



teaches in the same inferential way, that the sacrifice of 
Christ for sin is ample for the forgiveness of every man. 
To preach the duty of immediate belief on the Lord Jesus 
Christ as obligatory upon every man, in connection with 
the doctrine imputed to the Confession by the reviser, 
that God feels compassion for only the elect, and that 
Christ's sacrifice is not sufficient for all, would be self- 
contradictory. The two things cannot be put together. 
The reviser misunderstands the Standards, and reads into 
them a false doctrine that is not there. 

Confession xv. 5, 6, declares that " it is every man's 
duty to endeavor to repent of his particular sins particu- 
larly. Every man is bound to make private confession of 
his sins to God, praying for the pardon thereof, upon 
which, and the forsaking of them, he shall find mercy." 
How shall every such man find mercy, if the reviser's 
understanding of the Confession is correct ? if it teaches 
that God's love for sinners is limited to the elect, and 
that Christ's sacrifice is not sufficient for the sins of all ? 
According to the revised version, the meaning of the 
Westminster divines in this section is, that some men 
who " pray for pardon and forsake sin " shall " find 
mercy," and some shall not. 

Larger Catechism, 160, declares that " it is required of 
those that hear the word preached, that they attend upon 
it with diligence, preparation and prayer; receive the 
truth in faith, love, meekness and readiness of mind, as 
the word of God ; hide it in their hearts, and bring forth 
the fruit of it in their lives." Would God require all this 
from every hearer of the word, if he were not kindly 
disposed towards him? if he did not love and pity his 
immortal soul, and desire its salvation ? Does not this 
declaration mean that God will encourage, assist, and 
bless every hearer of the word without exception who 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



27 



does the things mentioned ? What shadow of reason 
is there for alleging that it means that God will help 
and bless some of these hearers, and some he will not ? 
But in order to make out that the section does not teach 
the universal offer of mercy, this must be the allega- 
tion. 

Larger Catechism, 95, declares that " the moral law is 
of use to all men, to inform them of the holy nature and 
will of God ; to convince them of their disabilit}- to keep 
it, and of the sinful pollution of their nature ; to humble 
them in the sense of sin and misery, and thereby help 
them to a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ, 
and of the perfection of his obedience." But what is the 
use of showing every man his need of Christ, if Christ's 
sacrifice is not sufficient for every man ? What reason is 
there for convincing every man of the pollution of his 
nature, and humbling him for it, unless God is for every 
man " most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, 
forgiving iniquity, transgression and sin ? " The doctrine 
taught in this section, that all men are to be convicted of 
sin, like the doctrine that all men are to repent and to 
pray, supposes that God sustains a common benevolent 
and merciful relation to them all. 

Confession xxi. 3, declares that " prayer with thanks- 
giving, being one special part of religious worship, is re- 
quired by God of all men." How could God require 
prayer from every man, if he were not disposed to hear 
the prayer of every man ? And does not this imply that 
he loves the soul of every man ? The duty of prayer sup- 
poses a corresponding kind and gracious feeling in God 
that prompts him to answer it ; that " he is the hearer of 
prayer, and that unto him all flesh should come." In 
order to make out his "offensive doctrine," the reviser 
must explain this section by appending to it : " Though 



28 



THE PEOPOSED EEVISION OF 



God requires prayer from all men, he is the hearer of 
prayer for only the elect." 

Confession vii. 3, declares that " man by his fall hav- 
ing made himself incapable of life by that (legal) cove- 
nant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly 
called the covenant of grace : wherein he freely offered to 
sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ, requiring of 
them faith in him, that they may be saved, and promising 
to give unto all those that are ordained unto life, his Holy 
Spirit, to make them willing and able to believe." Two 
distinct and different things are mentioned here : (a) an 
offer of salvation ; (b) a promise of the Holy Spirit to 
make the unwilling sinner willing to accept it. The num- 
ber of those to whom the offer of salvation is made is un- 
limited ; of those to whom the promise of the Spirit to 
"make them willing" is made, is limited by "ordination 
to life" or election. It is clear that God may desire that 
to be done by man under the influence of his common 
grace in the common call, which he may not decide and 
purpose to make him do by the operation of his special 
grace in the effectual call. His desire that sinners would 
hear his universal call to repentance may be, and is un- 
limited ; but his purpose to overcome their unwillingness 
and incline them to repentance may be, and is limited. 
God offers Christ's sacrifice to every man, without excep- 
tion, and assures him that if he will trust in it lie shall be 
saved, and gives him common grace to help and encour- 
age him to believe. This is a proof that God loves his soul 
and desires its salvation. But God does not, in addition 
to this universal offer of mercy, promise to overcome every 
man's aversion to believe and repent and his resistance 
of common grace. Election and pretention have no ref- 
erence to the offer of salvation or to common grace. They 
relate only to special grace and the effectual application of 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



29 



Christ's sacrifice. The universal offer of mercy taught in 
this section evinces the universality of God's compassion 
towards sinners. 

Larger Catechism, 63, declares that " the ministry of the 
gospel testifies that whosoever believes in Christ shall be 
saved, and excludes none that will come unto him." The 
reference here is not to the members of the visible Church, 
as one reviser contends who denies that the universal offer 
is in this section, because the persons spoken of are those 
who have not yet believed in Christ, and have not yet 
come to him. The motive is held out to such persons, 
that if they will believe and come, they shall be saved by 
the infinite and universal mercy of God which " excludes 
none that will come unto him." 

With what show of reason can it be said that a symbol 
containing such declarations as these respecting the nature 
and attributes of God, his requirement that every man 
confess sin to him, repent of it, pray for its forgiveness 
and trust in his mercy, contains no announcement of his 
infinite love and compassion ? This great and blessed 
truth is worked and woven all through the Standards, as 
the doctrines of the Divine existence and the immortality 
of the soul are through the Bible. The Bible is nonsense 
without these latter, and the Confession is nonsense with- 
out the former. 

The Westminster creed is being wounded in the house 
of its friends. To a spectator it appears amazing that so 
many who have " received and accepted" it as teaching 
u the system of doctrine contained in the Scriptures" 
should charge so many and so great errors upon it. If the 
Confession and Catechisms really are what they have been 
alleged to be, during the last six months, by some advo- 
cates of revision, they ought not to be revised at all, but 
to be repudiated. 



30 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



Y. 

THE MEANING AND VALUE OF THE DOCTRINE OF DECREES. 1 

The proposal to revise the Westminster Standards lias 
brought the doctrine of the Divine Decrees into the fore- 
ground. The controversy turns upon this pivot. Other 
features come in incidentally, but this is capital and con- 
trolling. This is the stone of stumbling and rock of of- 
fence. If election and reprobation were not in the Con- 
fession and Catechism, probably the fifteen presbyteries 
would not have overtured the Assembly. It is for this 
reason that we purpose to discuss the Meaning and Yalue 
of the Doctrine of Decrees, so plainly inculcated in the 
Scriptures, and from them introduced into the Westmin- 
ster symbol. We are certain that the Biblical truth of 
the sovereignty of God in the salvation of sinners, and of 
his just liberty to determine how many he will save from 
their sin, and how many he will leave to their self-will in 
sin, is greatly misunderstood by some who profess the 
Presbyterian faith, and who describe it in much the same 
terms with the anti-Calvinist, and inveigh against it with 
something of the same bitterness. Though differing 
greatly from one another in personal feeling and attitude 
towards the Confession, the conservative and the radical 
reviser nevertheless practically meet together at this point, 
and while the former has no desire to make any changes 

1 By permission, from the Presbyterian and Reformed Review, Janu- 
ary, 1890. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



31 



in the doctrine of decrees that will essentially impair the 
integrity of the Calvinistic system, he yet unintentionally 
aids the radical in bringing about a revolution in the sen- 
timent and creed of the Presbyterian Church concerning 
one of the most distinctive articles of its belief. Because 
revision, be it conservative or radical, contends that there 
is more or less that is un- Scriptural in the tenets of: elec- 
tion and reprobation as they are now formulated in the 
Standards, and that they are bad in their influence. The 
amount of error in them, and the degree in which they 
are injurious, is variously stated by advocates of revision. 
But the general opinion of this class is, that they require 
more or less amending to get rid of certain elements that 
are derogatory to the character of God, and are inconsist- 
ent with the Christian redemption. Anti-revision denies 
this. The only question of importance, therefore, in this 
juncture, is : Revision, or Nonre vision. And this, as we 
have said, turns mainly upon the third chapter of the 
Confession, entitled " Of God's Eternal Decree," together 
with the kindred declarations growing out of this, in other 
parts of the Standards. It will therefore be our aim to 
show that the doctrine of decrees, as it is found in the 
Westminster Standards, is neither un-Scriptural nor erro- 
neous ; and that it is a highly useful and edifying doctrine 
in the formation of the Christian character. We heartily 
adopt the affirmation of the Thirty-nine Articles, that 
" the godly consideration of predestination, and our elec- 
tion in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable 
comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves 
the workings of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works 
of the flesh and their earthly members, and drawing up 
their minds to high and heavenly things, as well because 
it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith, and fer- 
vently kindle their love towards God." 



32 



THE PEOPOSED EEVISION OF 



In carrying out our purpose, we shall mention certain 
characteristics of the Westminster doctrine that are both 
Scriptural and rational, and of great value both specula- 
tively in constructing the Christian system, and practically 
in forming the Christian experience. 

1. The first characteristic of the Confessional statement 
that we mention is, that it brings sin within the scope, 
and under the control of the Divine decree. Sin is one 
of the " whatsoevers " that have "come to pass," all of 
which are " ordained." Some would have the doctrine 
that sin is decreed stricken from the Confession, because 
in their view it makes God the author of sin. The Con- 
fession denies this in its assertion that by the Divine de- 
cree "violence is not offered to the will of the creature, 
nor is the liberty of second causes taken away, but rather 
established." In so saying, the authors had in mind the 
common distinction recognized in Calvinistic creeds and 
systems, between the efficacious and the permissive decree, 
though they do not use the terms here. The latter, like 
the former, makes an event certain, but by a different 
mode from that of the former. When God executes his 
decree that Saul of Tarsus shall be " a vessel of mercy," 
he works efficaciously within him by his Holy Spirit "to 
will and to do." When God executes his decree that Ju- 
das Iscariot shall be " a vessel of wrath fitted for destruc- 
tion," he does not work efficaciously within him " to will 
and to do," but permissively in the way of allowing him 
to have his own wicked will. He decides not to restrain 
him or to regenerate him, but to leave him to his own ob- 
stinate and rebellious inclination and purpose; and accord- 
ingly " the Son of man goeth as it was determined, but 
woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed " (Luke 22 : 
22; Acts 2: 23). The two Divine methods in the two 
cases are plainly different, but the perdition of Judas was 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



33 



as much foreordained and free from chance, as the con- 
version of Saul. Man's inability to explain how God can 
make sin certain, but not compulsory, by & permissive de- 
cree, is no reason for denying that he can do it or that he 
has done it. 

It is sometimes argued that the Confession excludes the 
tenet of the permissive decree, by its declaration that the 
" providence of God extendeth itself even to the first fall, 
and all other sins of angels and men, and that not by a 
bare permission" (Conf. v. 4). The "bare permission" 
which the Assembly rejects here is that of the Tridentine 
theologians, who asserted that sin arises from the " mere 
permission " of God. The Reformed theologians under- 
stood this to mean, that in respect to the fall of angels and 
men God is an idle and helpless spectator (deo otioso 
spectante), and that sin came into the universe without 
any positive decision and purpose on his part. This kind 
of "permission" implies that God could not have pre- 
vented sin had he so decided, and is really no permission 
at all ; because no one can properly be said to permit wdiat 
he cannot prevent. In order to exclude this view of 
" permission," the Assembly assert " such [a permission] 
as hath joined with it a most holy, wise, and powerful 
bounding and otherwise ordering and governing of [the 
sins of angels and men], in a manifold dispensation, to 
his own holy ends ; yet so as the sinfulness thereof pro- 
ceedeth only from the creature, not from God, ivho neither 
is nor can be the author of sin " This last clause declares 
that God's relation to the sin which he decrees, is not that 
of efficiency, but permission. For if God worked directly 
and efficaciously in angel or man " to will," when he wills 
wickedly, the " sinfulness of sin " would " proceed from 
God," and God would be " the author of sin." The per- 
missive decree is taught also in Larger Catechism, 19. 



O 1 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



'•' God by his providence permitted some of the angels, 
wilfully and irrecoverably, to fall into sin and damnation, 
limiting and ordering that, and all their sins, to his own 
glory." 

The permissive decree is supported by Scripture, in the 
statement that God " in times past suffered (eiWe) all na- 
tions to walk in their own ways " (Acts 14 : 16) ; that 
" the times of this ignorance God overlooked " {virepihwv) 
(Acts 17 : 30) ; that God " gave rebellious Israel their 
own desire (Psalm 78 : 29); that " he gave them their 
request " (Psalm 106 ; 15). This phraseology is never 
employed when holiness is spoken of. The Bible never 
says that God permits man to be holy, or to act right- 
eously. He efficaciously influences and actuates him to 
this. Accordingly the other Reformed creeds, like tbe 
"Westminster, mark the difference between God's relation 
to holiness and sin. The Second Helvetic, Ch. viii., says : 
" Quotiescunque Deus aliquid mail in Scriptura facere 
dicitur atque videtur, non ideo dicitur, quod homo malum 
non faciat, sed quod Deus fieri sinat et non prohiheat, 
jnsto suo judicio, qui prohibere potuisset, si voluisset." 
The Belgic Confession, Art. 13, asserts that God's " power 
and goodness are so great and incomprehensible, that he 
orders and executes his work in the most excellent and 
just manner even when the devil and wicked men act un- 
justly. We are persuaded that he so restrains the devil 
and all our enemies that without his will and permission 
they cannot hurt us." The Dort Canons, i. 15, teach that 
" God, out of his sovereign, most just, and unchangeable 
good pleasure hath decreed to learn some men in the com- 
mon misery into which they have wilfully plunged them- 
selves, and not to bestow upon them saving faith and the 
grace of conversion, but permitting them in his just judg- 
ment to follow their own way, at last, for the declaration 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



35 



of his justice, to condemn and punish them forever, not 
only on account of their unbelief, but also for all their 
other sins." 

And here is the place to notice the error of those who 
represent supralapsarianism as differing from infralapsa- 
rianism by referring sin to the efficacious decree, thereby 
making God the author of it. Dr. S chaff, for example, 
asserts that " Calvin carried the doctrine of the Divine 
decrees beyond the Augustinian infralapsarianism, which 
makes the fall of Adam the object of a permissive or pas- 
sive decree, to the very verge of supralapsarianism, which 
traces even the first sin to an efficient or positive decree " 
(Creeds, i. 453). But both schemes alike refer sin to the 
permissive decree, and both alike deny that God is the 
author of sin. Supralapsarians like Beza and Gomar re- 
pel this charge, which anti-Calvinists made against both 
divisions of the Calvinists. Brandt, who was on the Ar- 
minian side, so understood Gomar. In describing the 
difference between Arminius and Gomar, he says of the 
latter : " Gomarus maintained that it was appointed by an 
eternal decree of God, who among mankind should be 
saved, and who should be damned. From whence it re- 
sulted that some men should be drawn to righteousness, 
and being drawn were preserved from falling ; but that 
God suffered all the rest to remain in the common corrup- 
tion of human nature, and in their own iniquities " (Re- 
formation in the Low Countries, Book xviii.). Calvin, 
Inst. III. xxii., says that " man falls according to the ap- 
pointment of Divine providence, but falls by his own 
fault." 1 The difference between them relates to an alto- 

1 Sliedd : Dogmatic Theology, i. 409 (Note). A remark is in place 
here, upon the often cited "decretum horribile " of Calvin. The Di- 
vine sovereignty in the salvation of sinners when properly viewed, in- 
spires a solemn and religious awe before that Infinite Being who, in the 



36 



THE PEOPOSED EEVISION OF 



getlier different point : namely, the order in which the 
decrees of election and reprobation stand to that of crea- 
tion. The supralapsarian asserts that in the logical order 
of nature (not of time, for all the decrees are eternal), the 
decree to elect and reprobate certain men is before (supra) 
the decree to create them ; the infralapsarian, that it is 
after (infra). The former contends that God begins by 
electing some men and reprobating others, and in order to 
execute these two decrees creates man and permits (not 
efficiently causes) the fall. The infralapsarian contends 
that God begins by creating man and permitting (not 
causing) the fall, and then out of this fallen and guilty 
race elects some to life, and leaves others to their volun- 
tary sin and its just penalty. The supralapsarian order is 
liable to the charge that " God creates some men in order 
to damn them," because creation follows from reprobation. 
The infralapsarian order is not liable to this charge, be- 
cause creation does not follow from reprobation, but pre- 
cedes it. 1 The Yfestminster Assembly, in common with 

language of Eliliu, " giveth not account of any of his matters" (Job 
33 : 13). This is the meaning of Calvin's " decretum quidem horribile 
fateor " (Inst. III. xxiii. 7). Those who quote this in disparagement of 
the doctrine of predestination, suppose that he used "horrible" in the 
modern vulgar sense of " hateful " and " repulsive," as when persons 
speak of a "horrible stench," or an "awful noise." Of course he 
could not have intended to pour contempt upon what he believed to be 
a truth of revelation, by employing the word in this popular and some- 
what slangy signification. Calvin was a highly educated classical 
scholar, and his Latin is as accurate and elegant as any since the days 
of Cicero and Virgil. In the classical writers, " horror " sometimes sig- 
nifies awe and veneration. Lucretius, for example, describes the wor- 
ship of the gods as originating in the " mortalibus insitus horror" (Do 
Natura, v. 1164). The feeling of reverential fear is expressed in 
Jacob's words, " How dreadful is this place ! " (Gen. 28 :17). In this 
sense of the word, the doctrine of predestination might be called "a 
dreadful decree," without disparaging it in the least. 

1 The Arminian Eemonstrants stated the difference between the two 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



37 



the Calvinistic creeds previously made, adopted the infra- 
lapsarian order, though some theologians, like the elder 
Hodge, find a concession to the supralapsarians in some of 
their phraseology. 

The doctrine of the permissive decree has great value 
in two respects : (a) In taking sin out of the sphere of 
chance, (b) In explaining the tenet of pretention, or 
" foreordination to everlasting death." 

First, by the permissive decree, sin is brought within 
the Divine plan of the universe, and under the Divine 
control. Whatever is undecreed must be by hap-hazard 
and accident. If sin does not occur by the Divine pur- 
pose and permission, it occurs by chance. And if sin oc- 
curs by chance, the deity, as in the ancient pagan theolo- 
gies, is limited and hampered by it. He is not " God 
over all." Dualism is introduced into the theory of the 
universe. Evil is an independent and uncontrollable prin- 
ciple. God governs only in part. Sin with all its effects 
is beyond his sway. This dualism God condemns as er- 
ror, in his words to Cyrus by Isaiah, " I make peace and 
create evil ; " and in the words of Proverbs 16 : 4, " The 
Lord hath made all things for himself ; yea, even the 
wicked for the day of evil." " We believe," says the Bel- 



divisions of Calvinists as follows: "Our opponents teach, First, that 
God, as some [i.e., supralapsarians] assert, has ordained by an eternal 
and irresistible decree some from among men, whom he does not con- 
sider as created much less as fallen, to eternal life, and some to ever- 
lasting perdition, without any regard to their obedience or disobedience, 
in order to exert both his justice and his mercy. Secondly, that God, 
as others [i.e., infralapsarians] teach, considers mankind not only as 
created but fallen in Adam, and consequently as obnoxious to the curse ; 
from which fall and destruction he has determined to release some, and 
save them as instances of his mercy, and to leave others under the 
curse for examples of his justice, without any regard to belief or unbe- 
lief" (Brandt: Reformation in the Low Countries, Book xix.). 



38 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



gic Confession, Art. 13, " that God after he had created 
all things did not forsake them, or give them up to for- 
tune or chance, but that he rules and governs them ac- 
cording to his holy will, so that nothing happens in this 
world without his appointment ; nevertheless, God neither 
is the author of, nor can be charged with, the sins which 
are committed." 

Secondly, by the permissive decree, the pretention of 
some sinners and thereby their " f oreordination to ever- 
lasting death " is shown to be rational as well as Scriptu- 
ral, because God, while decreeing the destiny of the non- 
elect, is not the author of his sin or of his perdition. 
Pretention is a branch of the permissive decree, and 
stands or falls with it. Whoever would strike the doc- 
trine of pretention from the Standards, to be consistent 
must strike out the general doctrine that sin is decreed. 
If God could permissively decree the fall of Adam and 
his posterity without being the cause and author of it, he 
can also permissively decree the eternal death of an in- 
dividual sinner without being the cause and author of it. 
In pretention, God repeats, in respect to an individual, 
the act which he performed in respect to the race. He 
permitted the whole human species to fall in Adam in 
such a manner that they were responsible and guilty for 
the fall, and he permits an individual of the species to 
remain a sinner and to be lost by sin, in such a manner 
that the sinner is responsible and guilty for this. 

The Westminster Standards, in common with the Cal- 
vinistic creeds generally, begin with affirming the univer- 
sal sovereignty of God over his entire universe : over 
heaven, earth, and hell ; and comprehend all beings and 
all events under his dominion. Nothing comes to pass 
contrary to his decree. Nothing happens by chance. 
Even moral evil, which he abhors and forbids, occurs by 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



30 



" the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God ; " 
and yet occurs through the agency of the unforced and 
self -determining will of man as the efficient. 

Why should such a tenet as this, taught by Scripture 
and supported by reason, be stricken out of the Confes- 
sion ; or if not stricken out, so minimized as to declare 
that God decrees holiness but not sin, elects but does not 
pass by ? On the contrary, why should it not be pro- 
claimed boldly and everywhere, that above all the sin, 
and the misery caused by sin, in this world of mankind, 
there sits on the throne a wise, benevolent, and omnipo- 
tent Sovereign who for reasons sufficient in his view 
permitted, but did not cause or compel, the fall of angels 
and men, with the intention of guiding the issue of it all 
to an ultimate end worthy of himself — namely, the mani- 
festation of his two great attributes of mercy and justice : 
of mercy, in the salvation from sin of " a great multitude 
whom no man can number;" of justice, in leaving a 
multitude that can be numbered to the sin which they love 
and prefer, and its righteous punishment. 

2. The second characteristic of the Westminster doc- 
trine of decrees is the union of election and pretention. 
It includes both tenets, and is consistent in doing so. The 
discontent with the Confession is greater upon this point 
than upon the first that we have mentioned. Many do 
not object to what the Standards say upon the abstract 
subject of the Divine decree, who particularly dislike its 
concrete teaching upon election and pretention. The dis- 
crimination which the Confession makes between sinners ; 
the Divine purpose to save some and not all ; they as- 
sert to be un-Biblical and unjust. " The foreordination 
of some men to everlasting life, and of others to everlast- 
ing death, and pretention of all the non-elect, are equally 
inconsistent with a proper conception of Divine justice," 



40 



THE PEOPOSED REVISION OP 



is the assertion of a strenuous advocate of revision. Some 
would strike out both election and pretention ; others 
would strike out pretention and retain election. We shall 
endeavor to show that one of these proposals is as destruc- 
tive of the integrity of the system as the other ; that both 
tenets must stand, or both must go. 

That individual election is taught in the Bible is very 
generally conceded. But individual pretention is taught 
with equal plainness. The Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour 
of sinners, is as explicit upon this subject as he is upon 
that of endless punishment. Upon two occasions (Matt. 
13 : 14, 15 ; John 12 : 38-40), he quotes the words of 
God to Isaiah, 6 : 9, 10 : " Go and tell this people, Hear 
ye indeed, but understand not ; and see ye indeed, but 
perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and 
make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes ; lest they see 
with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand 
with their heart, and convert, and be healed." The 
prophet was instructed to declare the pretention of a part 
of Israel, and our Lord endorses the doctrine. And he 
frequently connects the voluntary and guilty rejection of 
his gracious offer of mercy with the eternal purpose and 
plan of God. The impenitence of Capernaum and of 
Chorazin and Bethsaida was guilty, and punishable with 
a punishment greater than that of Sodom ; yet these sin- 
ners were " the wise and prudent " from whom the " Lord 
of heaven and earth " had " hid the things " of salvation 
(Matt. 11 : 20-26). " Many," he says, " are called, but 
few are chosen " (Matt. 22 : 14 ; Luke 17 : 34-36). With 
grief and tears over the hardness of heart and the bitter 
enmity of the Jerusalem sinners, he at the same time de- 
clares their reprobation by God. " Upon you shall come 
all the righteous blood shed upon earth, from the blood of 
righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias. Behold your 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



41 



house is left unto you desolate " (Matt. 23 : 35-38). That 
the Apostolical Epistles teach pretention, we need not 
stop to prove. One principal objection made to the Paul- 
ine Christianity by its opponents is, that it is full of pre- 
destination both to holiness and sin. The Dort Canons, 
L vi., enunciate Paul's doctrine in the following state- 
ment : " That some receive the gift of faith from God, 
and others do not receive it, proceeds from God's eternal 
decree. According to which decree, he graciously softens 
the hearts of the elect, however obstinate, and inclines 
them to believe ; while he leaves the non-elect in his just 
judgment to their own wickedness and obdurac}^." " Unto 
you," says our Lord, "it is given to know the mysteries 
of the kingdom of Heaven, but to them it is not given " 
(Matt. 13 : 11). 

.Not only are both individual election and pretention 
taught in Scripture, but both are necessary in a creed 
in order to self-consistence. Pretention is the contrary 
of election, and one of two contraries necessarily implies 
the other. Eight implies wrong ; light implies dark- 
ness. No one would contend that there is light but 
not darkness ; right but not wrong. And no one should 
contend that there is an election of individuals, but not a 
pretention. 1 It is impossible to think of individual elec- 

lr riie qualifying epithet "individual" is important here; because 
while individual election implies individual pretention as its contrary, 
classical election does not. If a whole class (say dying infants) are 
elected, no individuals of it are passed by. The true contrary to clas- 
sical election is classical preterition, not individual pretention. In clas- 
sical election, there cannot be the salvation of a part and perdition of 
a part, as there can be in individual election. The whole class must 
either be elected, or else the whole class must be passed by ; the whole 
of it must be the objects of mercy, or else the whole of it must be the 
objects of justice. All must be saved, or else all must be lost. No dis- 
crimination is possible between individuals, as is the case in individual 
election. 



42 



THE PKOPOSED KEYISION OF 



tion alone by itself, or to teach it alone by itself. Indi- 
vidual election implies and suggests individual reprobation. 
The elect himself (that is, one who hopes he is of the 
elect) sometimes fears that he is one of the non-elect. St. 
Paul kept his body under, lest he should be a reprobate 
"cast away." That Christian who denies the doctrine of 
pretention, and does not sometimes fear that God may 
pass him by, is not a model for imperfectly sanctified men. 
If God does not elect a sinner, he must of course pass him 
by. If God decides not to convert a sinner into a 
saint, he must of course decide to let him remain a sinner. 
If God does not purpose to make Judas Iscariot " a vessel 
of mercy," he must of course purpose to leave him " a 
vessel of wrath." Individual election without its anti- 
thetic pretention is only one-half of the circle of Divine 
truth. When God operates efficaciously in the sinner's 
heart, to overcome his resistance of common grace, and 
his enmity to the law of God, this is election. When God 
does not work efficaciously, but permissively leaves the 
sinner to himself, this is pretention. And he must do 
one thing or the other, in the instance of every sinner. 
And he most purpose to do one thing or the other, in 
every instance. And the purpose is an eternal one. Con- 
sequently to affirm in a creed the decree of individual 
election, and deny that of pretention, is the height of ab- 
surdity. 

Accordingly, the Reformed creeds contain both doc- 
trines ; sometimes both of them verbally expressed, and 
sometimes pretention implied from election verbally ex- 
pressed. Both doctrines are specified in the following 
symbols : Second Helvetic, Gallican, Belgic, First Scotch, 
Irish, Lambeth, Dort, Westminster. Election alone is 
specified in Augsburg, First Helvetic, Heidelberg, and 
Thirty-nine Articles. That the decree of individual elec- 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



43 



tion necessarily involves the antithetic decree of individual 
pretention, is evinced by the fact that Ursinus, one of the 
authors, and the principal one, of the Heidelberg Cate- 
chism, which verbally affirms election but not pretention, 
presents an elaborate statement and defence of reproba- 
tion in his Christian Theology (Qu. 54), composed in ex- 
planation of this creed. 1 

What is pretention ? It is God's passing by a sinner in 
the bestowment of regenerating, not of common grace. 
All men are blessed with common grace. There is no 

1 Dr. Schaff, in the Evangelist, for November 14, 1889, asserts that 
the Gallican, Belgic, Second Helvetic, First Scotch, and Dort symbols, 
"are silent on the decree of reprobation and preterition. " The follow- 
ing extracts from his Creeds of Christendom show that this is an error. 
Gallican, Art. 12 : " God calleth out of corruption and condemnation 
those whom he hath chosen without consideration of their works, in 
order to display in them the riches of his mercy ; leaving (laissant) the 
rest in this same corruption and condemnation, in order to manifest 
in them his justice." Belgic, Art. 16: "God is merciful, since he 
delivers from perdition all whom he hath elected in Christ Jesus, 
without any respect to their works ; just, in leaving (laissant) the others 
in the fall and perdition wherein they have precipitated themselves." 
Second Helvetic, Cap. x. 4, 6 : " Though God knows who are his, and 
sometimes the fewness of the elect is spoken of, yet we are to have hope 
for all, and no one is rashly to be numbered with the reprobate. We do 
not approve of the impious words of those who say: 'If I am elected, I 
shall be saved, however I may act ; if I am one of the reprobate, 
neither faith nor repentance will be of any use, since the decree of God 
cannot be altered.'" First Scotch, Art. 8: "For this cause we are 
not afraid to call God our Father, not so much because he has created 
us, which we have in common with the reprobate, as that he has given 
to us his only Son to be our brother." Dort Canons, i. 15: "Holy 
Scripture testifieth that not all, but some only, are elected, while others 
are passed by in the eternal decree ; whom God out of his sovereign 
good pleasure hath decreed to leave in the misery into which they have 
wilfully plunged themselves, permitting them to follow their own way. 
And this is the doctrine of reprobation, which by no means makes God 
the author of sin (the very thought of which is blasphemy), but declares 
him to be a righteous judge and punisher of sin." 



44 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



election or reprobation in this reference. God's mercy in 
this form and degree of it is universal and indiscriminate. 
But common grace fails to save the sinner, because of his 
love of sin, his aversion to holiness, and his unbelief. 
The martyr Stephen's words are applicable to every man 
in respect to common grace : " Ye stiff-necked, ye do 
always resist the Holy Ghost " (Acts 7 : 51). Conse- 
quently, in order to save any sinner whatsoever requires a 
still higher grade of grace which, in the phrase of the 
Larger Catechism (67), " powerfully determines " his will 
by regenerating it. Here is where the Divine discrimina- 
tion comes in. It is with reference to this kind and de- 
gree of grace that God says : " I will have mercy on whom 
I will have mercy " (Ex. 33 : 19 ; Rom. 9 : 15). And this 
is the Scripture truth which is now on trial in the Pres- 
byterian Church. This is the particular doctrine which 
excites animosity in some minds, and which it is con- 
tended must be cut out of the Confession like cancerous 
matter that is killing the body. Let us consider the ob- 
jections that are made to it. 

1. It is objected that pretention is inconsistent with 
the infinite compassion of God for the souls of all men, 
and cannot be squared with such assertions as, " As I live, 
saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of the 
wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: 
turn ye, turn ye, for why will ye die? God so loved the 
world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoso- 
ever believeth in him might not perish but have everlast- 
ing life." 

The first reply to this is, that these and many similar 
affirmations of the Divine pity for the sinful soul and 
desire for its salvation, are written in the same inspired 
volume that contains such assertions as the following: 
" Many shall seek to enter in and shall not be able. He 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



45 



hath blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, that 
they should not see with their eyes, and be converted, 
and I should heal them. The Son of man goeth as it was 
determined ; but woe unto that man by whom he is be- 
trayed. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, 
and I will have compassion on whom I will have compas- 
sion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him 
that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. The chil- 
dren being not yet born, neither having done any good or 
evil, that the purpose of God according to election might 
stand not of works but of him that calleth, it was said, 
The elder shall serve the younger. The disobedient stum- 
ble at the word, whereunto also they were appointed." 
Since both classes of passages come from God, he must 
perceive that they are consistent with each other whether 
man can or not. Both, then, must be accepted as eternal 
truth by an act of faith, by every one who believes in the 
inspiration of the Bible. They must be presumed to be 
self-consistent, whether it can be shown or not. 

But, secondly, there are degrees of mercy. Because 
God does not show the highest degree of it to a particular 
sinner, it does not follow that he does not show him any 
at all. He may grant him the mercy of common grace, 
and when this is resisted and nullified by his hostile self- 
will and obstinate love of sin, he may decide not to bestow 
the mercy of special grace, and yet not be chargeable with 
destitution of love and compassion towards him. 1 Any 
degree of love is love ; and any degree of compassion is 
compassion. To contend that the Divine love must be of 
exactly the same degree towards all creatures alike or else 

1 Man is compelled to speak of God's decision or decree in this way, 
tliongh strictly there is no before or after for him. All his decrees are 
eternal and simultaneous. Yet there is an order of nature. Special 
grace supposes the failure of common grace. 



46 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



it is not love, is untenable. It is certain that God can 
feel love and pity towards the souls of all men, as his 
creatures and as sinners lost by their own fault, and mani- 
fest it in that measure of grace which " leads to repent- 
ance " (Rom. 2 : 4), and would result in it if it were not 
resisted, and yet not actually save them all from the con- 
sequences of their own action. The Scriptures plainly 
teach that God so loved the whole world that he gave his 
only-begotten Son to make expiation for " the sins of the 
whole world ; " and they just as plainly teach that a part 
of this world of mankind are sentenced, by God, to eternal 
death for their sins. The Arminian and the Calvinist 
both alike deny the doctrine of universal salvation, yet 
believe that this is compatible with the doctrine of God's 
universal benevolence. Both deny the inference that if 
God does not save every human being, he does not love 
the soul of every human being ; that if he does not do as 
much for one person as he does for another, he is unmer- 
ciful towards him. It is a fallacy to maintain, that unless 
God does all that he possibly can to save a sinner, he does 
not do anything towards his salvation ; as it would be fal- 
lacious to maintain, that unless God bestows upon a person 
all the temporal blessings that are within his power, he 
does not show him any benevolence at all. This fallacy 
lies under the argument against pretention. It is asserted 
that if God "passes by" a sinner in the bestowment of 
regenerating grace, he has no love for his soul, no desire 
for its salvation, and does nothing towards its welfare. 
But if God really felt no compassion for a sinner, and 
showed him none, he w T ould immediately jmnish him for 
his sin, and the matter would end here. The sinner's 
doom would be fixed. Just retribution would follow 
transgression instantaneously, and forever. And who can 
impeach justice? "As all men have sinned in Adam, 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



47 



and are obnoxious to eternal death, God would have done 
no injustice by leaving them all to perish, and delivering 
them over to condemnation on account of sin, according 
to the words of the Apostle : 6 That every mouth may be 
stopped, and all the world may become guilty before 
God ' " (Dort Canons, I. L). But God does not do this. 
He suffers long and is forbearing with every sinner with- 
out exception. There is not a transgressor on earth, in 
Christendom or Heathendom, who is not treated by his 
Maker better than he deserves ; who does not experience 
some degree of the Divine love and compassion. God 
showers down upon all men the blessings of his provi- 
dence, and bestows upon them all more or less of the 
common influences and operation of the Holy Spirit. 
This is mercy to the souls of men universally, and ought 
to move them to repent of sin and forsake it. This com- 
mon grace and universal benevolence of God is often 
spoken of in Scripture. " Despisest thou, O man, the 
riches of God's goodness, and forbearance, and long-suffer- 
ing, not knowing [recognizing] that the goodness of God 
leads [tends to lead] thee to repentance ; but after thy 
hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself 
wrath against the day of wrath ? " (Rom. 2 : 4, 5). Here 
is the common grace of God enjoj-ed by men universally, 
and thwarted by their love of sin, and obstinate self-will 
in sin. But is God unmerciful and destitute of compas- 
sion towards this man, if he decides to proceed no further 
with him, but leave him where he is, and as he is ? Is all 
that God has done for him in the way of long-suffering, 
forbearance, kindness, and inward monitions in his con- 
science, to count for nothing ? If this treatment of the 
sinner is not benevolence and compassion, what is it ? It 
is mercy in God to reveal to every man the law of God, 
nay even " the wrath of God against all ungodliness and 



48 



THE PKOPOSED EEVISION OF 



unrighteousness of men who hold the truth in unright- 
eousness," for by this revelation the man is warned and 
urged to turn from sin and live. This is one way in 
which God says to the sinner, " Turn ye, turn ye, for why 
will ye die? As I live I have no pleasure in the death of 
him that dieth." It is mercy in God, and is so represented 
by St. Paul, when he "does not leave himself without 
witness, in that he does good, sending rain from heaven, 
and fruitful seasons, filling men's hearts with good and 
gladness, and makes of one blood all nations of men for 
to dwell on all the face of the earth, and determines the 
bounds of their habitation, that they should seek the Lord, 
if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though 
he be not far from every one of us " (Acts 14 : IT ; 17 : 
26, 27). That this gracious and fatherly interest in their 
souls' welfare is repelled and nullified by their preference 
for sin and love of worldly pleasure, and comes to naught, 
does not alter the nature of it as it lies in the heart of 
God. It is Divine mercy and love for human souls, not- 
withstanding its ill success. 

Common grace is great and undeserved mercy to a sin- 
ner, and would save him if he did not resist and frustrate 
it. In and by it, " God commandeth all men everywhere 
to repent," and whoever repents will find mercy. In and 
by it, God commands every hearer of the written word 
to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and whoever believes 
shall be saved. The common grace of God consists of 
the written, or in the instance of the heathen the unwrit- 
ten word, together w r ith more or less of the convicting 
operation of the Holy Spirit. Says Hodge (ii. 667), 
" The Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit, as the Spirit of 
truth, of holiness, and of life in all its forms, is present 
with every human mind, enforcing truth, restraining from 
evil, exciting to good, and imparting wisdom, or strength, 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



49 



when, where, and in what measure seemeth to him good. 
In this sphere, also, he ' divideth to every man severally 
as lie will.' " Whoever is in any degree convinced of 
sin, and is in any degree urged by his conscience to con- 
fess and forsake it, is a subject of common grace. And 
whoever stifles conviction, refuses confession, and " holds 
down the truth in unrighteousness," resists common grace. 
St. Paul charges this sin upon both the heathen and the 
evangelized. Common grace, we repeat, is great and un- 
deserved mercy to a sinner, and by it God evinces his 
pity for his soul, and his desire for its salvation. But 
man universally, unevangelized and evangelized, nullifies 
this form and degree of the Divine mercy, by his opposi- 
tion. The opponent of pretention comes in here at this 
point, and contends that God is bound to go yet further 
than common grace with sinful man, and subdue his en- 
mity by creating him anew in the spirit of his mind ; and 
that if he " passes him by," and leaves him where he is, 
and as he is, he has no love for his soul. The sovereignty 
of God in this matter of bestowing regenerating grace is 
denied. To bestow it upon Jacob but not upon Esau, 
upon some but not upon all, is said to be injustice and 
partiality. 

Scripture denies that God is under obligation to follow 
up his defeated common grace with his irresistible special 
grace. It asserts his just liberty to do as he pleases in 
regard to imparting that measure of grace which produces 
the new birth, and makes the sinner " willing in the day 
of God's power." The passages have already been cited. 
And reason teaches the same truth. Mercy from its very 
nature is free and optional in its exercise. God may mani- 
fest great and unmerited compassion to all men in com- 
mon grace and the outward call, and limit his compassion 
if he please to some men in special grace and the effectual 
4 



50 



THE PEOPOSED REVISION OF 



call. He may call upon all men to repent and believe, 
and promise salvation to all that do so, and yet not incline 
all men to do so. No one will say that a man is insin- 
cere in offering a gift, if he does not along with it produce 
the disposition to accept it. And neither should one as- 
sert this of God. God sincerely desires that the sinner 
would hear his outward call, and that his common grace 
might succeed with him. He sincerely desires that every- 
one who hears the message : " Ho, every one that thirst- 
eth, come ye to the waters ; yea, come buy wine and milk 
without money," would come just as he is, and of his own 
free will, " for all things are ready." The fact that God 
does not go further than this with all men and conquer 
their aversion, is consistent with this desire. !No one con- 
tends that God is not universally benevolent because he 
bestows more health, wealth, and intellect upon some than 
upon others. And no one should contend that he is not 
universally merciful, because he bestows more grace upon 
some than upon others. The omnipotence of God is able 
to save the whole world of mankind, and to our narrow 
vision it seems singular that he does not ; but be this as 
it may, 'it is false to say that if he does not exert the 
whole of his power, he is an unmerciful being towards 
those who abuse his common grace. That degree of for- 
bearance and long-suffering which God shows towards 
those who resist it, and that measure of effort which he 
puts forth to convert them, is real mercy towards their 
souls. It is the sinner who has thwarted this benevolent 
approach of God to his sinful heart. Millions of men in 
all ages are continually beating back God's mercy in the 
outward call and nullifying it. A man who has had 
common grace, has been the subject of the Divine com- 
passion to this degree. If he resists it, he cannot charge 
God with unmercifulness, because he does not bestow 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



51 



upon him still greater mercy in the form of regenerating 
grace. A beggar who contemptuously rejects the five 
dollars offered by a benevolent man, cannot charge stingi- 
ness upon him because after this rejection of the five dol- 
lars he does not give him ten. Any sinner who complains 
of God's " passing him by " in the bestowment of regen- 
1 erating grace after his abuse of common grace, virtually 
says to the High and Holy One who inhabits eternity, 
" Thou hast tried once to convert me from sin ; now try 
again, and try harder." 1 

God's desire that a sinner should " turn and live " 
under common grace, is not incompatible with his pur- 
pose to leave him to " eat of the fruit of his own ways, 
and be filled with his own devices " — which is the same 
thing as " foreordaining him to everlasting death." A 
decree of God may not be indicative of what he desires 
and loves. He decrees sin, but abhors and forbids it. 
He decrees the physical agony of millions of men in 
earthquake, flood, and conflagration, but he does not 
take delight in it. His omnipotence could prevent this 



! An advocate of revision remarks that "the Calvinist is doubtless 
right in saying that God is under no obligations to save us. Still, 
even if this be the case, God may be, and I believe is under obliga- 
tions to afford every man an opportunity to be saved ; that he has no 
right to ' pass by ' anyone. " Two criticisms upon this suggest them- 
selves. First, God in the outward call does afford every man an oppor- 
tunity to be saved. To every evangelized man he says, "Believe on 
the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shaft be saved." This is " an oppor- 
tunity to be saved." To every unevangelized man he says, " Repent of 
thy sins, and I will forgive them." This is "an opportunity to be 
saved." That in both instances the opportunity is rejected, does not 
destroy the fact. Secondly, if God is '•' under obligations to afford the 
opportunity to be saved," then salvation is an act of justice and the 
performance of a duty. In affording man the opportunity to be saved, 
God discharges his obligations. In this case, " grace is no more grace " 
(Rom. 9 : 6). 



52 



THE PROPOSED REVISION -OE 



suffering in which he has no pleasure, but he decides for 
adequate reasons not to do so. Similarly he could pre- 
vent the eternal death of every single member of the 
human family, in which he takes no pleasure, but decides 
not to do so for reasons that are wise in his sight. The 
distinction between the revealed will and the secret 
will of God is a valid one ; J and the latter of these 
wills may be no index of the former, but the exact 
contrary of it. This is particularly the case when evil 
is the thing decreed. 2 

2. Secondly, it is objected to pretention that it is par- 
tiality. It would be, if sinners had a claim upon God for 
his regenerating grace. In this case he could make no 
discrimination, and must regenerate and save all. Par- 
tiality is impossible within the sphere of mercy, because 
the conditions requisite to it are wanting. It can exist 
only within the sphere of justice, where there are rights 
and duties; claims and obligations. A debtor cannot 
pay some of his creditors and " pass by " others, without 
partiality. But in the sphere of mercy, where there is 
no indebtedness, and no claim, the patron may give to 
one beggar and not to another, if he so please, because he 
" may do what he will with his own " — that is, with what 



1 God's revealed will, or will of desire, is expressed in Isa. 55 : 1 ; 
Ezek. 33 : 11 ; 1 Tim. 2:4; Tit. 2:11. His secret will, or will of de- 
cision and purpose in particular instances, is expressed in Mat. 13 : 11 ; 
John 6: 37, 44, 65; Rom. 9 : 16, 18, 19, 

2 The difference between will as general desire and inclination, and 
will as a particular volition or decision in a special instance, is seen in 
human action, and is well understood. For sufficient reasons, a man 
may decide in a particular case to do by a volition something entirely 
contrary to his uniform and abiding inclination. He is uniformly 
averse and disinclined to physical pain, but he may decide to have his 
leg amputated. This decision is his "decree," and is no index of 
what he is pleased with. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



53 



lie does not owe to any one. The parable of the talents 
was spoken by our Lord to illustrate the doctrine of the 
Divine sovereignty in the bestowment of unmerited gifts ; 
and the regeneration of the soul is one of the greatest of 
them. 

This is a conclusive answer to the charge of partiality 
and injustice, but some would avoid the charge by striking 
out the tenet of pretention, and retaining that of election. 
In this case, election becomes universal. If no men are 
omitted in the bestowment of regenerating grace, all men 
are elected. This is universal salvation, because all the 
elect are infallibly regenerated and saved. And this is 
the manner in which the Later Lutheranism handles the 
doctrine. It denies pretention, and strenuously opposes 
this article of the Reformed creed. If the Presbyterian 
Church, after having adopted pretention for two centu- 
ries, shall now declare that it is an tin-Scriptural and erro- 
neous tenet, the meaning of the revision will be, that God 
has no sovereign liberty to " pass by " any sinners, but 
must save them all. This is the form in which election 
is held by Schleiermacher and his school. They contend 
that there is no reprobation of any sinner whatsoever. 
All men are elected, because to pass by any is injustice 
and partiality. " Calling (vocatio)," says Dorner, " is 
universal, for the Divine purpose of redemption is just 
as universal as the need and capacity of redemption so that 
the notion of a Divine decree to jpass by a portion of 
mankind^ and to restore freedom of decision only to the 
rest, is out of the question " (Christian Doctrine, iv. 183). 
It is this form of Universalism, which postulates the offer 
of mercy to all men as something due to them, if not in 
this life then in the next, and denies that the regener- 
ating work of the Holy Spirit is confined to earth and 
time, but goes on in the intermediate state, that is per- 



54 



THE PROPOSED EEVISION OF 



colating into the Scotch and American Calvinism from 
the writings of one class of German divines. Should 
the presbyteries reject the doctrine of pretention they 
%vill help on this tendency. A creed like the Heidel- 
berg, or the Thirty-nine Articles, may not have preten- 
tion verbally stated, and yet irwply it by its statement 
of election and by other parts of the symbol. But if 
a creed like the Westminster, which has both doctrines 
verbally stated, is subsequently revised so as to strike out 
pretention, then this tenet cannot be implied. It is 
positively branded as error, and rejected by the revising 
Church. If therefore the presbyteries shall assert that 
God does not " pass by " any sinner in respect to regener- 
ating grace, they will commit themselves to universal 
salvation in the form above mentioned. Election will no 
longer be balanced and limited by pretention, bnt will be 
unlimited and universal. 

And with this will be connected another fatal error : 
namely, that God is under obligation to elect and regen- 
erate every man. If justice forbids him to " pass by " any 
sinners, and " ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their 
sin," he is bound to elect all sinners and " predestinate 
them to everlasting life." He has no liberty or sover- 
eignty in the case. He cannot say, " I will have mercy 
upon whom I will have mercy, and whom I will I harden 
[do not soften] " (Horn. 9 : 18). This transmutes mercy 
into justice. Pardon becomes a Divine duty. .The offer 
of Christ's sacrifice, nay even the providing of it, becomes 
a debt which God owes to every human creature. This is 
the assumption that lies under all the various modes of 
Universalism. Sinful men, loving sin, bent on sin, are 
told that they are entitled to the offer of mercy and re- 
generating grace ; that they must have a " fair opportu- 
nity " of salvation, if not here, then hereafter. Sinful men, 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



55 



full of self-indulgence, confessing no sin and putting up 
no prayer for forgiveness, and who have all their lifetime 
suppressed the monitions of conscience and quenched the 
Holy Spirit's strivings with them in his exercise of com- 
mon grace, are taught that if God shall pass them by, and 
leave them to the sin that they prefer, he is an unmerci- 
ful despot. 

And here is the point where the practical value of the 
doctrine of election and pretention is clearly seen. With- 
out it, some of the indispensable characteristics of a gen- 
uine Christian experience are impossible. Hence it is 
that St. Paul continually employs it in producing true re- 
pentance for sin, deep humility before God, utter self-dis- 
trust, sole reliance on Christ's sacrifice, and a cheering 
hope and confidence of salvation, founded not on the sin- 
ner's ability and what God owes him, but on God's gra- 
cious and unobliged purpose and covenant. This is the 
doctrine which elicits from him the rapturous exclama- 
tion, " O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and 
knowledge of God. For who hath first given to him, and 
it shall be recompensed unto him again ? For of him, 
and through him, and to him are all things : to whom be 
glory forever. Amen." This is the doctrine which in- 
structs the believer to ascribe all his holy acts, even the 
act of faith itself, to the unmerited and sovereign grace of 
his redeeming God, and with Charles Wesley to sing : 

' 1 Hangs my helpless soul on Thee." 

It is said that the doctrine of pretention is not and can- 
not be preached. It does not require technical terms and 
syllogistical reasoning, in order to preach a doctrine. 
Who so preaches the doctrine of the trinity, or of regen- 
eration, or of original sin, or of vicarious atonement, or 
of endless punishment? The doctrine of pretention is 



66 



THE PROPOSED REVISION" OF 



preached whenever the herald proclaims to the transgres- 
sor of God's law that sin is guilt and not misfortune ; that 
the criminal has no claim upon the pardoning power for 
pardon ; that the Supreme Judge might justly inflict 
upon him the penalty which his sin deserves ; that his 
soul is helplessly dependent upon the optional unobliged 
decision of his Maker and Saviour ; and that it is noth- 
ing but God's special grace in regeneration that makes 
him to differ from others who go down to perdition. 
That these humbling and searching truths are taught 
more thoroughly at some times than others, is true. That 
they will empty some pews at all times, is true. It may 
be that they are less taught now than formerly ; and if 
so, this is not the time either to revise or construct creeds. 
But whenever the Divine Spirit is present with his illum- 
ination, and the Scriptures are plainly preached, they 
come into the foreground. If they shall be revised out of 
the Confession, it is certain that they will be taught less 
and less, and will finally disappear from the religious ex- 
perience. 

The sinner's acknowledgment that God might justly 
pass him by, and leave him in his resistance of common 
grace, is a necessary element in genuine repentance. 
Whoever denies this, lacks the broken and contrite heart. 
Such was the sorrow of the penitent thief : " We are in 
this condemnation justly ; for we receive the due reward 
of our deeds." Such w r as the penitence of the prodigal 
son : " Father, I have sinned against heaven, and am no 
more worthy to be called thy son ; make me as one of thy 
hired servants." Such was the temper of the leper : 
" Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean." !No one 
of these penitents took the ground that God owed him 
pardon and regeneration, and that to pass him by and or- 
dain him to the eternal death which sin deserves would 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



57 



be an act dishonorable to God. To deny God's sover- 
eignty in his exercise of mercy, is to set up a claim for 
salvation, and whoever does this evinces that he has no 
true view of sin as ill desert, and no true sorrow for it as 
such. There is need of this doctrine in all ages, owing to 
the pride of the human heart, and its unwillingness to 
bend the knee and renounce all merit and confess all de- 
merit before God. And there is special need of it in our 
age, when the Christian experience is defective at this 
point, and redemption is looked upon as something which 
God owes to mankind, and is bound to provide for them. 
Unless this important truth is repristinated, and restored 
to its proper place in the consciousness of the Church, the 
current of Restorationism will set stronger and stronger, 
and the result will be a great apostasy in Christendom. 
This is no time to eradicate it from the Calvinistic creeds, 
but on the contrary to reaffirm it with confidence, and 
defend it out of Scripture. 

Some say that pretention is liable to be understood as 
preventing a sinner's salvation, and would have an ex- 
planation added to the doctrine, to the effect that this is 
not its meaning or intent. We would respect the opin- 
ion of any Christian believer who sincerely thinks that 
the language of the Standards is unguarded, and who 
does not desire to change their doctrines but only to make 
sure that they are understood. This is not revision, but 
explanation / and a declarative statement similar to that of 
the United Presbyterians, which leaves the Confession un- 
touched, is the least objectionable of all the plans before 
the Presbyterian Churches. But if it be borne in mind 
that pretention is by the permissive, not efficacious de- 
cree, what call is there for such a guarding clause ? How 
does or can God's decision to leave a sinner to do just 
what he likes, hinder the sinner from faith and repent- 



58 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



ance ? How does or can God's purpose to save another 
sinner, prevent this sinner from smiting on his breast, 
saying, " God, be merciful to me, a sinner ? " " It is not 
the fault of the gospel,-' say the Dort Canons (I., iii. iv. 
9), " nor of Christ offered therein, nor of God who calls 
men by the gospel and confers upon them various gifts, 
that those who are called by the ministry of the word re- 
fuse to come and be converted. The fault lies in them- 
selves." There is nothing causative in the decree of pret- 
ention. John Bunyan's statement of the matter is plain 
common sense. " Eternal reprobation makes no man a 
sinner. The foreknowledge of God that the reprobate 
will perish, makes no man a sinner. God's infallible de- 
termining upon the damnation of him that perisheth, 
makes no man a sinner. God's patience and forbearance 
until the reprobate fits himself for eternal destruction, 
makes no man a sinner" (Reprobation Asserted, xi.). 
Whatever God does by a permissive decree, excludes 
causation on his part. God is not the author of the sin 
in which he leaves the sinner ; or of the impenitence to 
which he gives him over. His action in pretention is in- 
action, rather than action. He decides to do nothing to 
prevent the free will of the sinner from its own action. 
"With what color of reason can it be said that God forces 
a man into perdition, when this is all he does to him ? 
that God hinders a man from faith and repentance, when 
he lets him entirely alone ? To put the proposed expla- 
nation and caveat into the Confessional doctrine of pret- 
ention, would be like writing under Landseer's lions, 
" These are not sheep," or under Paul Potter's bull, 
" This is not a horse." 

The pretention of a sinner is not his exclusion from 
salvation. Exclusion is a positive act ; but pretention is 
a negative one. When God gives special regenerating 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



59 



grace to only one of two persons, he does not work upon 
the other to prevent him from believing and repenting 
under the operation of the common grace which he has 
bestowed upon both alike. He merely leaves the other 
to his own free will to decide the matter ; assuring him 
that if he repents he will forgive him ; that if he believes 
he will save him. The bestowment of common grace 
upon the non-elect shows that non-election does not ex- 
clude from the kingdom of heaven by Divine efficiency, 
because common grace is not only an invitation to believe 
and repent, but an actual help towards it ; and a help that 
is nullified solely by the resistance of the non-elect, and 
not by anything in the nature of common grace, or by 
any preventive action of God. The fault of the failure 
of common grace to save the sinner, is chargeable to the 
sinner alone ; and he has no right to plead a fault of his 
own as the reason why he is entitled to special grace. It 
is absurd for him to contend that God has no right to re- 
fuse him regenerating grace, because he has defeated the 
Divine mercy in common grace. The true way out of the 
difficulty for the sinner is, not to demand regenerating 
grace as a debt by denying that God has the right to 
withhold it, but to confess the sinful abuse and frustra- 
tion of common grace, and to cry with the leper : " Lord, 
if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean." 

Having thus demonstrated the Scriptural and self -con- 
sistent character of the doctrine of decrees as contained in 
the Westminster Standards, we turn now to consider two 
erroneous conclusions that are drawn from it, which are 
urged as reasons for their revision : First, that it shuts 
out the entire heathen world from Christ's redemption ; 
and, second, that it implies the damnation of a part of 
those who die in infancy. 

Some advocates of revision seem, unintentionally prob- 



60 



THE PEOPOSED EEVISION OF 



ably, to load down the Confession with faults not belong- 
ing to it. They put the worst interpretation upon its 
terms and phraseology ; insist that its defenders have no 
right to its necessary implications and natural inferences 
in determining what it really means ; and that an analytic 
and positive affirmation .of every particular point must 
be found in it. Interpreting in this prejudiced manner, 
they assert that the Standards do not declare the universal 
love and compassion of God ; that they teach that God 
creates some men in order to damn them ; 1 that their doc- 
trine of election discourages ministers from making the 
universal offer of Christ's salvation, and hinders sinners 
from accepting it ; and that he who adopts them as they 
read cannot consistently believe that any of the heathen 
are saved, and that no dying infants are lost. They carry 
a wrong idea of election and reprobation into their exege- 
sis of the Standards. They suppose that these necessarily 
imply that only a very few are elected, and that very many 
are reprobated. But there is nothing in the nature of 
either election or pretention, that determines the number 
of each ; nothing that implies that the elect must be the 
minority, and the non-elect the majority, or the converse. 

1 A false exegesis of Eomans 9 : 20 is sometimes employed to prove 
that God creates men sinners. " Shall the thing formed (7rAacyta) say 
to him that formed (irXaffavTi) it, Why hast thou made me thus ? " does 
not mean, " Shall the thing created say to him that created it, Why hast 
thou created, me thus ? " Creation ex nihilo would require ktIctis, not 
■K\a<rixa. The latter term denotes only the formative act of a moulder, 
not the supernatural act of a creator. The whole sinful mass of man- 
kind whom God created holy, have become sinful by their own act, and 
lie in his hand like clay in the hands of the potter. Compare Isa. 29 : 
16 ; 45 : 9. The potter, as such, does not give the clay its properties, 
but merely shapes the clay into vessels of honor or dishonor as he 
pleases. Says Hodge, in loco, "It is to be borne in mind, that Paul 
does not here speak of the right of God over his creatures as creatures^ 
but as sinful creatures." Compare Shedd: On Eomans, 9 : 20. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



01 



Tlie size of each circle depends upon the will of him who 
draws it. God, conceivably, might have elected the whole 
human family without an exception, as Sehleiermacher 
says he did. Or, conceivably, he might have reprobated 
the whole human family, because he was not in justice 
obliged to save it. There is nothing in the nature of elec- 
tion that makes it inapplicable to the heathen, or of pret- 
ention. God may elect and regenerate a heathen if he 
please, or he may leave him in the sin which he loves. 
And the same is true of the ideas of election and preten- 
tion as related to dying infants. Since everything in this 
matter depends wholly upon the sovereign will of God, he 
may regulate his choice as he pleases. He may choose 
dying infants as individuals, as he does adults ; or he may 
choose them as a class. And he might reject dying in- 
fants as individuals, as he does adults ; or he might reject 
them as a class. For since infants like adults have a sin- 
ful nature, and, in the phrase of the Auburn Declaration, 
" in order to be saved, need redemption by the blood of 
Christ, and regeneration by the Hoty Ghost," they re- 
quire the exercise of unmerited mercy, which on grounds 
of justice might be withheld. 

We cannot, therefore, determine from the mere idea of 
election how many are elected, or from that of pretention 
how many are passed by. This question can be answered 
only by God himself, and this answer, so far as he has 
vouchsafed to give it, is contained in his word. That 
the Scriptures plainly teach that the total result of Christ's 
redemption will be a triumphant victory over the king- 
dom of Satan, and that the number of the redeemed will 
be vastly greater than that of the lost, we shall assume. 
It is also plainly taught in Scripture, that God's ordinary 
method is to gather his elect from the evangelized part of 
mankind. Does Scripture also furnish ground for the 



62 



THE PEOPOSED EEVISIOK OF 



belief, that God also gathers some of his elect by an ex- 
traordinary method from among the unevangelized, and 
without the written word saves some adult heathen " by 
the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy 
Ghost ? " We contend that the Confession so under- 
stands the Scriptures, in its declaration that there are some 
" elect persons [other than infants] who are incapable of 
being outwardly called by the ministry of the word." To 
refer the " incapacity " here spoken of to that of idiots 
and insane persons, is an example of the unnatural exe- 
gesis of the Standards to which we have alluded. The 
hypothesis that the Confession teaches that there are elect 
and non-elect idiots, and elect and non-elect maniacs, is 
remarkable. It is incredible for two reasons. First, 
idiots and maniacs are not moral agents, and therefore as 
such are neither damnable nor salvable. They would be 
required to be made rational and sane, before they could 
be classed with the rest of mankind. It is utterly im- 
probable that the Assembly took into account this very 
small number of individuals respecting whose destiny so 
little is known. It would be like taking into account 
abortions and untimely births. Secondly, these " elect 
persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by 
the ministry of the word," are contrasted in the imme- 
diate context with " others not elected, who although 
they may be called by the ministry of the word never 
truly come to Christ ;" that is to say, they are contrasted 
with rational and sane adults in evangelized regions. But 
idiots and maniacs could not be put into such a contrast. 
The " incapacity " therefore must be that of circum- 
stances, not of mental faculty. A man in the heart of 
nnevangelized Africa is incapable of hearing the written 
word, in the sense that a man in New York is incapable 
of hearing the roar of London. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



63 



Consequently, the Confession, in this section, intends 
to teach that there are some nnevangelized men who are 
" regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit" 
without " the ministry of the written word," and who 
differ in this respect from evangelized men who are re- 
generated in connection with it. There are these two 
classes of regenerated persons among God's elect. They 
are both alike in being born, " not of blood, nor of the 
will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." 
They are both alike in respect to faith and repentance, 
because these are the natural and necessary effects of re- 
generation. Both alike feel and confess sin ; and both 
alike hope in the Divine mercy, though the regenerate 
heathen has not yet had Christ presented to him. As 
this is the extraordinary work of the Holy Spirit, little 
is said bearing upon it in Scripture. But something is 
said. God's promise to Abraham was, that in him should 
"all the families of the earth be blessed " (Gen. 12:3). 
St. Paul teaches that " they are not all Israel which are 
of Israel" (Rom. 9 : 6) ; and that "they which are of 
faith, the same are the children of Abraham " (Gal. 3 : 7). 
Our Lord affirms that " many shall come from the east 
and west, the north and the south, and shall sit down 
with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of 
heaven" (Matt. 8:11). Christ saw both penitence and 
faith in the unevangelized centurion, respecting whom he 
said, " I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel " 
(Matt. 8 : 5-10). The faith of the " woman of Canaan," 
an alien and stranger to the Jewish people and covenant, 
was tested more severely than that of any person who 
came to him in the days of his flesh, and of it the gra- 
cious Redeemer exclaimed, " O woman, great is thy faith !" 
These two classes of the regenerate have their typical 
heads in Scripture. Says Kurtz, " Of those who are 



64 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



blessed in the seed of Abraham, Naomi represents the 
people of God who are to proceed from the ancient peo- 
ple of the covenant, and Rath represents those proceed- 
ing from the heathen world." That the Church is not 
to expect and rely upon this extraordinary work of the 
Spirit, it is needless to say. That this work is extensive, 
and the number of saved unevangelized adults is great, 
cannot be affirmed. But that all the adult heathen are 
lost is not the teaching of the Bible or of the Westmin- 
ster Standards. 

The declaration in Confession x. 4, and Larger Cate- 
chism, 60, does not refer at all to the heathen as such, 
but only to a certain class of persons to be found both 
in Christendom and heathendom, and probably more 
numerously in the former than in the latter. The " men 
not professing the Christian religion " are those who 
reject it, either in spirit, or formally and actually ; that 
is to say, legalists of every age and nation, evangelized 
or unevangelized, who expect future happiness by fol- 
lowing " the light of nature " and reason, and the ethical 
" religion they do profess," instead of by confessing sin 
and hoping in the Divine mercy. The Jewish Pharisee, 
the Roman Julian and Antoninus, the self-satisfied Buddh- 
ist sage following the "light of Asia," the Mohamme- 
dan saint despising Christianity, the English Hume and 
Mill, all of every race and clime who pride themselves 
on personal character and morality, and lack the humility 
and penitence that welcome the gospel, are the class 
spoken of in these declarations. They press no more, 
and probably less, upon the heathen than upon the 
Christian world ; because the most hostile and intense 
rejection of the doctrines of grace is to be found in Chris- 
tian countries, rather than in Pagan. They do not shut 
out of the kingdom of heaven any heathen who has the 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



65 



spirit of the publican, but do shut out every heathen and 
every nominal Christian who is destitute of it. The 
object of this section of the Confession, which is the 
same as the eighteenth of the Thirty-nine Articles, is 
to teach that no human creature, evangelized or un- 
evangelized, can be saved on any but evangelical princi- 
ples ; namely, by unmerited grace, not by personal merit. 
It is only another way of proclaiming St. Paul's doc- 
trine, that " by the deeds of the law no flesh shall be 
justified." 

That this is the correct understanding of the "West- 
minster Standards is corroborated by the fact that the 
Calvinism of the time held that God has his elect among 
the heathen. The Second Helvetic Confession (i. 7), 
teaches it. Zanchius, whose treatise on Predestination is 
of the strictest type, asserts it. Witsius and others sug- 
gest that the grace of God in election is wide and far 
reaching. The elder Calvinists held with the strictest 
rigor that no man is saved outside of the circle of election 
and regeneration, but they did not make that circle to be 
the small, narrow, insignificant circumference which their 
opponents charge upon them. And there is no reason to 
believe that the Westminster Assembly differed from the 
Calvinism of the time. 

And this brings us to the subject of " elect infants." 
There is no dispute that the Confession teaches that there 
are " elect dying infants." Does it also teach that there 
are " non-elect dying infants ? " In other words, does 
the phrase "elect infants" imply that there are " non- 
elect infants," as the phrase "elect adults" does that 
there are " non-elect adults ? " This depends upon 
whether the cases are alike in all particulars. The argu- 
ment is from analogy, and analogical reasoning requires 
a resemblance and similarity upon which to rest. But the 



66 



THE PKOPOSED EEVISION OF 



Confession directs attention to a great and marked diver- 
sity between infant and adult regeneration, which sets off 
the two classes from one another, making some things 
true of one that are not of the other. The Confession 
points at and signalizes the striking difference in the 
manner in which the Holy Ghost operates, in each in- 
stance. Infants are incapable of the outward call and 
common grace ; adults are capable of both. Consequent- 
ly an elect infant dying in infancy is " regenerated by 
Christ, through the Spirit," without the outward call and 
common grace ; but an elect adult is " regenerated by 
Christ through the Sprit,*' in connection with the ex- 
ternal call and common grace, and after both have been 
frustrated by him. Election and non-election in the case 
of adults is the selection of some and omission of others 
who are alike guilty of resisting the ordinary antecedents 
of regeneration. Election in the case of dying infants 
is wholly apart from this. There being this great dis- 
similarity between the two classes, it does not follow 
that every particular that is true of one must be of the 
other ; that because election is individual in the instance 
of adults it must necessarily be so in that of infants ; 
that because adults are not elected as a class infants can- 
not be. The state of things in which the regeneration of 
an adult occurs, namely after conviction of sin and more 
or less opposition to the truth, is entirely diverse from 
that in which the regeneration of a dying infant occurs ; 
namely, in unconsciousness and without conviction of sin. 
The only form of grace that is possible to the dying 
infant is regenerating grace, and the only call possible 
is the effectual call. If therefore God manifests any 
grace at all to the dying infant, it must be special and 
saving ; and if he call him at all, he must call him effect- 
ually. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



67 



Now, since the authors of the Confession have them- 
selves distinctly specified such a peculiar feature in the 
regeneration of the dying infant, it is plain that they re- 
garded it as differing in some respects from that of adults, 
and intended to disconnect it from that of adults and 
consider it by itself. For why should they take pains, 
when speaking of elect infants, to call attention to the fact 
that the " Holy Ghost worketh when, and where, and how 
he pleaseth," if they did not mean to signalize the ex- 
traor dinar iness of the Divine action in infant regenera- 
tion ? And if infant regeneration is extraordinary in not 
having been preceded by the usual antecedents of common 
grace and the outward call, why may it not be extraordi-' 
nary in being universal and not particular ? that of a class 
and not of individuals ? Does not the singularity that 
distinguishes the infant in regard to regeneration without 
conviction of sin, suggest that of electing the whole class ? 
But what is far more conclusive, does not the fact that 
the Assembly does not limit infant election by infant pret- 
ention, as it limits adult election by adult pretention, 
actually prove that there is this great diversity in the two 
cases ? Does not the fact that the Assembly, while ex- 
plicitly, and with a carefulness that is irritating to many 
persons, balancing and guarding the election of adults by 
pretention, does not do so with the election of infants, 
show beyond doubt that they believed their election to be 
unlimited, and that no dying infants are "passed by" in 
the bestowment of regenerating grace ? We have already 
seen that the proposed omission of pretention, so as to 
leave only election in the case of adults, would make their 
election universal, and save the whole class without excep- 
tion. The actual omission of it by the Assembly in the 
case of dying infants has the same effect. It is morally 
certain that if the Assembly had intended to discriminate 



68 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



between elect and non-elect infants, as they do between 
elect and non-elect adults, they would have taken pains to 
do so, and would have inserted a corresponding clause 
concerning infant pretention to indicate it. Whoever 
contends that they believed that pretention applies to in- 
fants, is bound to explain their silence upon this point. 
Had infant election been explicitly limited by infant pret- 
ention in the Confession, it would have been impossible 
for any candid expounder of it to hold that it permits sub- 
scribers to it to believe in the salvation of all dying in- 
fants. But Calvinistic divines for the last century or 
more have put this interpretation upon this section of the 
Confession, namely, that infant election is not individual 
but classical, and we think they are justified in so doing 
by the remarkable omission in this case. 1 

On the face of it, the thing looks probable. The case 
of the adult, in which there is both the outward call and 
the effectual, both common grace and regenerating, may 
be governed by the principle of individuality ; while that 
of the infant, in which there .is only the effectual call and 
regenerating grace, may be governed by the principle of 
community. Of those who have had the outward call 
and have rejected it, some may be taken and others left ; 
while of those who have not had the outward call and 
have not rejected it, all may be taken. It is election in 
both instances ; that is, the decision of God according to 
the counsel of his own will. In one case, God sovereignly 
decides to elect some ; in the other, to elect all. And it 

1 Respecting the necessity of construing the Confession as teaching 
that there are non-elect infants, Dr. Schaff remarks as follows : " The 
Confession nowhere speaks of reprobate infants, and the existence of 
such is not necessarily implied by way of distinction, although it prob- 
ably was in the minds of the framers, as their private opinion, which 
they wisely withheld from the Confession " (Creeds of Christendom, i. 
795). 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



69 



is unmerited mercy, in both instances ; because God is not 
bound and obliged by justice to pardon and eradicate the 
sin of an infant any more than that of an adult. And 
there is nothing in the fact that an infant has not resisted 
common grace, that entitles it to the exercise of special 
grace. In the transaction, God is moved wholly by his 
spontaneous and infinite mercy. He does an act to which 
he is not compelled by the sense of duty or of justice, 
either to himself or to sinners, but which he loves to do, 
and longs to do, because of his infinite pity and compas- 
sion. 1 

That many of the elder Calvinists believed that there 
are some non-elect infants is undeniable ; and that in the 
long and heated discussions of the seventeenth century 
between Calvinists and Arminians, and between Calvinists 
themselves, many hard sayings were uttered by individual 
theologians which may be construed to prove that man 
is necessitated to sin, that God is the author of sin, and 
that the majority of mankind are lost, is equally undeni- 
able. But the Westminster Confession must be held re- 
sponsible for only what is declared on its pages. The 
question is not, whether few or many of the members of 
the Assembly held that some dying infants are lost, but 
whether the Confession so asserts ; is not, whether any 
Calvinists of that day, in endeavoring to show how God 
decrees sin, may not have come perilously near represent- 
ing him as doing it by direct efficiency, but whether the 
Reformed and Westminster creeds do this. 



1 The assumption that God is obliged by justice to offer salvation to 
all mankind, and to redeem them all, precludes all gratitude and praise 
for redemption, on their part. Why should they give thanks for a favor 
that is due to them, and which it is the duty of God to bestow ? Chris- 
tians adore " the riches of God's grace " because it is utterly unclaim- 
able on their part, and unobligated on his. 



70 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



The rigor of the theology of the elder Calvinists lias 
been exaggerated. They took a wide and large view of 
the possible extent of election. Owen is as strict as most 
of them. Bat in arguing against the Arminians, in sup- 
port of the guilt and condemnability of original sin, he 
says : " Observe that in this inquiry of the desert of orig- 
inal sin, the question is not, What shall be the certain lot 
of those vjho depart this life under the guilt of this sin 
only f but what this hereditary and native corruption 
doth deserve, in all those in whom it is ? For as St. Paul 
saith, 'We judge not them that are without' (especially 
infants), 1 Cor. 5 : 13. But for the demerit of it in the 
justice of God, our Saviour expressly affirmeth that 'un- 
less a man be born again, he cannot enter into the king- 
dom of God.' Again, we are assured that no unclean 
thing shall enter into heaven (Rev. 21). Children are 
polluted with hell-deserving uncleanness, and therefore 
unless it be purged with the blood of Christ, they have 
no interest in everlasting happiness. By this means sin 
is come upon all to condemnation, and yet we do not 
peremptorily censure to hell all infants departing out of 
this world without the laver of regeneration [i.e., baptism], 
the ordinary means of waiving the punishment due to 
this pollution. That is the question de facto, which we 
before rejected : yea, and two ways there are whereby 
God saveth such infants, snatching them like brands from 
the fire. First, by interesting them into the covenant, if 
their immediate or remote parents have been believers. 
He is a God of them, and of their seed, extending his 
mercy unto a thousand generations of them that fear him. 
Secondly, by his grace of election, which is most free 
and not tied to any conditions ; by which I make no 
doubt but God taketh many unto him in Christ whose 
parents never knew, or had been despisers of the gospel. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



71 



And this is the doctrine of our Church, agreeable to the 
Scriptures affirming the desert of original sin to be God's 
wrath and damnation" (Owen: Arminianism, Ch. vii.). 
This is the salvation of infants by both covenanted and un- 
covenanted mercy, and Owen maintains that it is a tenet 
of Calvinism. That he does not assert the classical elec- 
tion of infants is true ; but he asserts the individual elec- 
tion of some infants outside of the Church. 

Such, then, is the Westminster doctrine of the Divine 
Decree. It is the common Augustino-Calvinistic doc- 
trine, ^o part of it can be spared, and retain the integ- 
rity of the system. "Whatever may have been the inten- 
tion of the few first proposers of revision ; or whatever 
may be the intention of the many various advocates of it 
who have joined them ; the grave question before all 
parties now is, Whether the Presbyterian Church shall 
adhere to the historical Calvinism with which all its past 
usefulness and honor are inseparably associated, or whether 
it shall renounce it as an antiquated system which did 
good service in its day, but can do so no longer. The 
votes of the presbyteries within the coming six months 
will answer this question. 



72 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



VI. 

WHAT IS THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD IN ELECTION ? 1 

It is generally conceded by those who advocate a revi- 
sion of the Confession, that " the sovereignty of God in 
election " must be retained as a fundamental truth. Sev- 
eral presbyteries have voted for revision, with the explicit 
declaration that this part of the third chapter must stand ; 
and they have at the same time voted to strike out the 
doctrine of jpreterition. Among them is the large and in- 
fluential presbytery of New York. With the highest re- 
spect for our brethren and copresbyters, and with sincere 
regret to be obliged to differ from the majority, we pro- 
ceed to raise and answer the question, Whether the doc- 
trine of " the sovereignty of God in election " can be held 
unimpaired and in its integrity, if the tenet of pretention 
is omitted from " the system of doctrine contained in the 
Scriptures." 

The presbytery have declared to the General Assembly : 

1, That " they deprecate most earnestly all such changes 
as would impair the essential articles of our faith ; " and 

2, That " they desire the third chapter of the Confession, 
after the first section, to be so recast as to include these 
things only : The sovereignty of God in election ; the gen- 
eral love of God for all mankind ; the salvation in Christ 
Jesus provided for all, and to be preached to every creat- 
ure." In this recasting, they specify several sections of 
chapter third which they would strike out, and among 



1 New York Observer, March 6, 1890. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



73 



them is the section which declares that God " passes by " 
some of mankind, and u ordains them to dishonor and 
wrath for their sin." According to this deliverance, the 
presbytery of New York supposes that it can hold the 
doctrine of u the sovereignty of God in election 99 unim- 
paired and in all its essential features, while denying and 
rejecting the doctrine of pretention. An examination of 
the nature and definition of " sovereignty," we think, will 
show that this is impossible. 

Sovereignty is a comprehensive term. It contains sev- 
eral elements. First it denotes supremacy. A sovereign 
ruler is supreme in his dominions. All other rulers are 
under him. Secondly, sovereignty denotes independence. 
Says Woolsey, "In the intercourse of nations certain 
states have a position of entire independence of others. 
They have the power of self-government, that is, of inde- 
pendence of all other states as far as their own territory 
and citizens are concerned. This power of independent 
action in external and internal relations constitutes com- 
plete sovereignty " (Political Science, i. 204). Thirdly, 
sovereignty denotes optional power / that is, the power to 
act or not in a given instance. It is more particularly 
with reference to this latter characteristic of free alterna- 
tive decision, that " the sovereignty of God in election " is 
spoken of. In his election of a sinner to salvation, God 
as supreme, independent, and sovereign, acts with entire 
liberty of decision, and not as obliged and shut up to one 
course of action. 

This is the common understanding and definition of 
sovereignty as applied to decisions and acts. Says Black- 
stone : u By the sovereign power is meant the power of 
making laws ; for wherever that power resides all other 
powers must conform to, and be directed by it, whatever 
appearance the outward form and administration of the 



74 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



government may put on. For it is at any time in the 
option of the legislature to alter that form and adminis- 
tration by a new edict or rule, and put the execution of 
the law into whatever hands it pleases, by constituting 
one, or a few, or many executive magistrates " (Introduc- 
tion, 2). Blackstone gives the same definition of sover- 
eignty, when it is vested in a king (Book II., ch. vii.). 
The king has no superior to oblige or compel him to one 
course of action. He has independent and optional 
power. This is the reason why a monarchy is inferior to 
a republic, as an ideal of government, and the secret of 
the steady tendency to the latter form of government, in 
the earth. Sovereign, supreme, independent, and op- 
tional power is too great a power to be lodged in the 
hands of one man. Its safest deposit is in the hands of 
all the people. 

The pardoning power is a sovereign power, and this 
implies choice between two alternatives. If the gover- 
nor of New York has the power to grant a pardon to a 
criminal, but not the power to refuse it, he is not 
sovereign in the matter. If of two criminals, he cannot 
pardon one and leave the other under the sentence of the 
court, he is not sovereign in the matter. When it is said 
that in a democracy the sovereign power is vested in the 
people, the meaning is that the people have the right 
to make such a constitution and laws as they please. No 
one would contend that the people of New York have 
sovereign power in the case, if they are obliged to put 
imprisonment for debt, or any other particular statute, 
into their code. A " sovereignty " that has no alternative 
is none at all. 

God is a sovereign, and the highest of all. He may 
create a universe or not, as he pleases. Were he obliged 
or compelled to create, he would not be sovereign in 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 75 



creating. He may arrange and order his universe as he 
pleases. If he were confined to but one order, he would 
not be sovereign in his providence. But not to waste 
time on these self-evident generalities, we come to the 
case in hand : the " sovereignty of God in election." 
The question is, Whether God is " sovereign" in electing, 
regenerating, and saving a sinner, if he has no option in 
the matter? if he cannot " pass by" the sinner, and 
leave him unregenerate, unpardoned, and unsaved? 
One would think that such a question as this could have 
but one answer in the negative, had not a majority of the 
presbytery of New York answered it in the affirmative. 
The Westminster Confession declares that " the sover- 
eignty of God in election " means, that he may elect or 
pass by the sinner as he pleases. The Kevised Con- 
fession declares that it means, that he may elect him but 
not pass him by. The Old Confession declares that sover- 
eignty means, that God may bestow regenerating grace 
upon a sinner who is resisting common grace, or may not 
bestow it. The New Confession declares that it means, 
that he may bestow regenerating grace upon him, but 
may not refuse to bestow it. The Old Confession de- 
clares that sovereignty means, that God may pardon the 
sinner or not, as he pleases. The New Confession de- 
clares that it means, that he may pardon him but not 
deny him a pardon. 

Now we ask, What sovereignty has God in the salva- 
tion of the sinner, if he has no alternative in regard to 
election, regeneration, and pardon ? if eternal justice re- 
quires that he elect, and forbids that he pass by ? if 
eternal justice requires that he regenerate, and forbids 
him to leave in unregeneracy ? if eternal justice requires 
that he pardon, and forbids him to refuse to pardon? 
To strike out pretention from the Confession, is to de- 



76 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



clare that it is an unscriptural doctrine, and to brand it 
as error. And to assert " the sovereignty of God in 
election " after having done this, is to assert that an act 
that has no alternative is a sovereign act. 

But God himself has decided the question. He asserts 
his sovereign right to optional decision in the matter of 
human salvation. In that wonderful description of his 
being and attributes which he gave to Moses, among 
other declarations he says, " I will be gracious to whom I 
will be gracious, and will shew mercy to whom I will shew 
mercy" (Ex. 33 : 19). In this solemn pronunciamento 
with which he prefaced the whole work of human salva- 
tion, he distinctly declares that he is under no obligation 
to redeem sinful men, but that whatever he does in the 
premises is of his own unobliged, free, and sovereign 
mercy and decision. Still more explicitly, in what is 
perhaps the most terrible passage in all Scripture, God 
asserts that he will pass by and leave in their sin some 
who have refused his common call, and frustrated his 
common grace. " Because I have called, and ye refused ; 
I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded ; but 
ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of 
my reproof ; I also will laugh at your calamity ; I will 
mock when your fear cometh. Then shall they call upon 
me, but I will not answer ; they shall seek me early, but 
they shall not find me " (Prov. 1 : 24-26, 27). God incar- 
nate teaches the same truth, that " one shall be taken and 
the other left" (Luke 17: 34-36). And St. Paul recites 
the words of God to Moses, " I will have mercy on whom 
I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I 
will have compassion," as a conclusive demonstration of 
the Divine sovereignty in salvation. 

The only instance of the retention of election, and re- 
jection of pretention, in a creed, is that of the Cumber- 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



77 



land Presbyterians. Our Arminian brethren are con- 
sistent and logical, like the Westminster Standards, in 
teaching both election and pretention ; only they assert 
that both are conditional. Men are elected because of 
faith, and are passed by because of unbelief. There has 
never been any proposition to revise pretention out of an 
Arminian creed. Arminius, Episcopius, Limborch, Wes- 
ley, and Watson understand that election necessarily im- 
plies the antithetic non-election. 1 A proposition to revise 
the Confession so that it would teach conditional election 
and pretention, would be self-consistent but anti-Calvin- 
istic ; but the proposition to revise it so as to declare that 
God elects but does not pass by sinners, is neither con- 
sistency nor Calvinism. If adopted, the Northern Presby- 
terian Church will have an illogical and mutilated creed, 
and will resemble a wounded eagle attempting to fly with 
but one wing. 

1 According to Brandt, the Remonstrants defined predestination as 
follows : " God hath decreed from all eternity to elect those to ever- 
lasting life, who through his grace believe in Jesus Christ and persevere 
in faith and obedience ; and on the contrary hath resolved to reject the 
unconverted and unbelieving to everlasting damnation " (Reformation 
in the Low Countries, Book xxi. ). 



78 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



VII. 

THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS AND THE "LARGER HOPE." 1 

The doctrines of Calvinism formulated in the Westmin- 
ster Standards are represented by many persons as destin- 
ing the vast majority of the human race to an eternity of 
sin and misery. They are pessimistic, it is said ; envelop- 
ing this brief human life in gloom and darkness. The 
elect are very few ; and the non-elect are very many. 
Practically, the human species is lost forever, like the devil 
and his angels. Over this theological system they would 
write the Dantean inscription on the portal of Hell, " All 
hope abandon, ye who enter here.'' We shall endeavor 
to show that this estimate is utterly erroneous, and that 
" the system of doctrine contained in the Scriptures," and 
presented in the Confession, teaches that an immense ma- 
jority of the human family will be saved by the redemp- 
tion of the dying and risen Son of God and Lord of Glory, 
and that the "larger hope" has ample scope and verge 
enough within its limits. 

Calvinism emphasizes the doctrine of regeneration : the 
doctrine, namely, that God by an instantaneous act im- 
parts the principle of spiritual life to the sinful soul with- 
out its co-operation or assistance, so that the new birth is 
not dependent upon, or conditioned by, man's agency. 
Men who are " born again " are " born not of blood, nor 
of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of 



1 In part, from the Methodist Quarterly Review, May, 1889. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



79 



God " (John 1 : 13). This doctrine runs all through the 
Westminster Standards. It is closely connected with the 
tenet of election, for this regulates the bestowment of 
regenerating grace. Effectual calling includes it, for a 
prominent factor in this is that work of God whereby he 
" takes away the heart of stone, and gives the heart of 
flesh " (Conf. x. 1). In thus magnifying regeneration, 
the Confession accords with Revelation. For on look- 
ing into the Scriptures, we find that the salvation of the 
human soul is made to depend absolutely upon the new 
birth. Christ said to Nicodemus, " Except a man be born 
again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." This implies 
that everj r man who is born again will see the kingdom of 
God. Regeneration, consequently, decides human des- 
tiny. Whoever knows how many of the human family 
shall have been quickened from spiritual death to spirit- 
ual life, by the mercy of God the Holy Spirit, knows how 
many of them shall be saved. Regeneration determines 
human salvation, because it produces everything requisite 
to it. The great act of faith in the blood of Christ, by 
which the sinner is justified, is described as dependent 
upon it. " Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, 
is born of God" (1 John 5: 1). "No man can come to 
me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him " 
(John 6 : 44). " Ye believed, even as the Lord gave to 
every man " (1 Cor. 3 : 5). " As many as were ordained 
to eternal life, believed " (Acts 13 : 48). " Unto you it is 
given in the behalf of Christ, to believe on him " (Phil. 
1 : 29). " By grace are ye saved through faith ; and 
that not of yourselves : it is the gift of God " (Eph. 2 : 8). 
u Christ is the author and finisher of faith " (Heb. 12 : 2). 
Faith, repentance, justification, and sanctification all result 
naturally and infallibly from that work of the Holy Spirit, 
whereby he " quickens " the soul " dead in trespasses and 



80 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



sins" (Eph. 2:1), and by "enlightening the mind, and 
renewing the will, persuades and enables man to embrace 
Jesus Christ, freely offered to him in the gospel " (Shorter 
Catechism, 31). Regeneration is thus the root from 
which the whole process of salvation springs. The regen- 
erate child, youth, or man, immediately believes, repents, 
and begins the struggle with remaining sin. The regen- 
erate infant believes, repents, and begins the struggle with 
remaining sin the moment his faculties admit of such 
activities. He has latent or potential faith, repentance, 
and sanctification. 

How extensive then is regeneration, is the great ques- 
tion. In Scripture and in the Confession it is represented 
to be as extensive as election, and no more so. " Whom 
he did predestinate, them he also called ; and whom he 
called, them he also justified ; and whom he justified, 
them he also glorified " (Rom. 8 : 30). " All those whom 
God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is 
pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to 
call, by his word and Spirit, out of the state of sin and 
death, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ " (Conf. x. 
1). In attempting, therefore, to answer approximately 
that question which our Lord declined to answer definitely, 
namely, " Are there few that be saved ? " it is necessary, 
first, to determine the j>eriod within which the regenerat- 
ing operation of the Holy Spirit occurs ; and, secondly, 
the range of his operation. 

Respecting the first point, revelation teaches that the 
new birth is confined to earth and time. There is not a 
passage in Scripture which, either directly or by implica- 
tion, asserts that the Holy Ghost will exert his regenerat- 
ing power in the soul of man in any part of that endless 
duration which succeeds this life. The affirmation, " My 
Spirit shall not always strive with man " (Gen. 6 i 3), 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 81 

proves that the dispensation of the Spirit will not be ever- 
lasting ; and the accompanying declaration, "Yet his 
days shall be a hundred and twenty years,'- implies that 
it will be coterminous with man's mortal life. Accord- 
ingly, in the Old Testament, the death of the body is rep- 
resented as the decisive epoch in man's existence, and this 
earthly life the period during which his endless destiny is 
determined. " The wicked is driven away in his wick- 
edness [at death] ; but the righteous hath hope in his 
death " (Prov. 14 : 32). " When a wicked man dieth, his 
expectation shall perish " (Prov. 11 : 7). " If thou warn 
the wicked of his way to turn from it ; if he do not turn 
from his way, he shall die in his iniquity " (Ezek. 33 : 9). 
" To him that is joined to all the living, there is hope : for 
the living know that they shall die ; but the dead know 
not anything, neither have they any more a reward " 
(Eccl. 9 : 4-6). " In death there is no remembrance of 
thee ; in the grave, who shall give thee thanks? " (Ps. 6 : 
5). " Wilt thou show wonders to the dead f Shall the 
dead arise and praise thee ? Shall thy loving-kindness be 
declared in the grave f " (Ps. 88 : 10, 11). In the New 
Testament, the Saviour of man also makes death to be the 
critical point in man's history. He says to the Pharisees, 
" If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins " 
(John 8 : 21, 24). This solemn warning, which he twice 
repeats, loses all its force, if to die in sin is not to be hope- 
lessly lost. Christ teaches the same truth in the parable 
of Dives. The rich man asks that his brethren may be 
exhorted to faith and repentance before they die, because 
if impenitent at death as he was, they will go to " hell " 
as he did, and be "in torments" as he was. And he 
teaches the same truth in his frequent warning, " Watch, 
therefore, for ye know not at what hour your Lord Com- 
eth " (Matt. 24:42). The Apostolical Epistles declare 
6 



82 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



the momentous nature of death, in their frequent asser- 
tion of " an accepted time," and of "the day of salva- 
tion " (2 Cor. 6:2; Heb. 3 : 7-19 ; 4 : 7). The closing up 
of the Word of God by St. John, affirms a finality that 
evidently refers to what man has been and done here on 
earth. "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and 
he which is filthy, let him be filthy still ; and he that is 
righteous, let him be righteous still ; and he that is holy, 
let him be holy still " (Eev. 22 : 11, 12). 

Still further proof that death is the deciding point in 
man's existence, is found in those effects of regeneration 
which have been spoken of. Faith, repentance, hope, 
and struggle with remaining sin are never represented in 
Scripture as occurring in the future life. After death the 
regenerate walks by sight, not by faith ; has fruition in- 
stead of hope ; and is completely sanctified. Faith, re- 
pentance, hope, and progressive sanctification are de- 
scribed as going on up to a certain point denominated 
" the end" when they give place to sinless perfection. 
" He that endureth to the end shall be saved : " the end 
of this state of existence, not of the intermediate state. 
" We desire that every one of you do show the same 
diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end." 
" Christ shall confirm you unto the end." " Whose house 
are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of 
the hope unto the end." In all such passages, the end of 
this mortal life is meant. And to them must be added 
the important eschatological paragraph, 1 Cor. 15 : 24-28, 
which teaches that there is an " end " to Christ's work of 
mediation and salvation, when " there remaineth no more 
sacrifice for sins " (Heb. 10 : 26). 

The large amount of matter in Scripture which teaches 
that the operation of the Spirit in the new birth and its 
effects belongs only to this life, cannot be invalidated by 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



83 



the lonely text concerning Christ's " preaching to the 
spirits in prison:" a passage which the majority of exe- 
getes, taking in ajl ages of the Church, refer to the preach- 
ing of Noah and other " ambassadors of Christ ; " but 
which, even if referred to a personal descent of Christ into 
an under world, would be inadequate to establish such a 
revolutionizing doctrine as the prolongation of Christ's 
mediatorial work into the future state, the preaching of 
the gospel in sheol, and the outpouring of the Holy Ghost 
there. For the dogma of a future redemption for all 
the unevangelized part of mankind is radically revolution- 
izing. It is another gospel, and if adopted would result 
in another Christendom. For nearly twenty centuries, the 
Church has gone upon the belief that there is no salvation 
after death. All of its conquests over evil have come from 
preaching the solemn truth that " now is the day of salva- 
tion." It has believed itself to be commanded to proclaim 
that " after death is the judgment " of sin, not its forgive- 
ness. But if the Church has been mistaken, and there is 
a " probation " in the future life for all the unevangelized 
of all the centuries, and it is announced, as all the truth 
of God ought to be, then the eternal world will present a 
totally different aspect from what it has. Heretofore the 
great Hereafter has been a gulf of darkness for every im- 
penitent man, heathen or nominal Christian, as he peered 
into it. Now it will be a darkness through which gleams 
of light and hope are flashing like an aurora. The line 
between time and eternity, so sharply drawn by the past 
Christianity and Christendom, must be erased. A differ- 
ent preaching must be adopted. Hope must be held out 
instead of the old hopelessness. Death must no longer be 
represented as a finality, but as an entrance for all une- 
vangelized mankind upon another period of regeneration 
and salvation. Men must be told that the Serniramises 



84 



THE PEOPOSED EEVISION OF 



and Cleopatras, the Tiberiuses and Neros, may possibly 
have accepted the gospel in hades. Children in the Sab- 
bath-schools must be taught that the vicious and hardened 
populations of the ancient world, of Sodom and Gomor- 
rah, of Babylon and Nineveh, of Antioch and Rome, 
passed into a world of hope and redemption, not of justice 
and judgment. 

Such a doctrine takes away all the seriousness of this 
existence. The " threescore years and ten " are no longer 
momentous in their consequences. If the future world is 
a series of cycles, within any one of which the transition 
from sin to holiness, from death to life, may occur, all the 
solemnity is removed from earth and time. The u now " 
is not " the accepted time, and the day of salvation." 
One " time " is of no more consequence than another, if 
through all endless time the redemption of sinners is go- 
ing on. And what is still more important, the moral and 
practical effects of this theory will be most disastrous. 
For it is virtually a license to sin. Should God announce 
that he will regenerate and pardon men in the next world, 
it would be equivalent to saying to them that they may 
continue to sin in this world. And, of course, if the 
Church should believe that all the unevangelized portion 
of mankind may be saved in the intermediate state, it will 
make little effort to save them here and now. 

With these representations of Scripture, respecting the 
period of time within which the regeneration and salva- 
tion of the soul occur, the Westminster Standards agree. 
" The souls of believers are at their death made perfect in 
holiness, and do immediately pass into glory " (S. C. 37). 
"The souls of the wicked are at their death cast into 
hell " (L. C. 86). The Confessional doctrine is, that death 
is a finality for both the saint and sinner. There is no 
extirpation of sin after " the spirit returns to God who 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



85 



gave it." At death, the unregenerate man is left in sin. 
At death, the regenerate but imperfectly sanctified man 
is made perfect in holiness. The gradual process of pro- 
gressive sanctification from the remainders of original 
corruption, is confined to this life. So the Scriptures 
teach. "Blessed are the dead that die in the Lord from 
henceforth [i.e., from the time of their death] : Yea, 
saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labors" 
(Rev. 14: 13). "There remaineth a rest to the people 
of God. Let us therefore labor to enter into that rest 
(Heb. 4: 9, 11). This "rest" is total cessation from the 
temptation, the race, and the fight with sin which charac- 
terize the present imperfect state. " To be absent from 
the body, is to be present with the Lord " (2 Cor. 5:8); 
and to be present with the Lord is to " see him as he is; " 
and to see him as he is, is to " be like him," sinless and 
perfect (1 John 3 : 2). 

The doctrine that gradual sanctification from, sin con- 
tinues to go on after death, implies, not rest, but strug- 
gle, strain, toil, and conflict with remaining corruption. 
This would be a continuation in the next life of that se- 
vere experience in this life in which the believer "groans 
being burdened ; " in which he is often worsted in the 
contest, though victorious in the main ; in which he cries, 
"O wretched man, who shall deliver me." To suppose 
such a wearisome condition of the believer's soul during 
the long period between death and the resurrection, can- 
not be harmonized with the descriptions of the restful, 
joyful consciousness of believers when they are " with the 
Lord," and with the words of Christ, " This day shalt 
thou be with me in paradise." 

The notion that indwelling sin is to be purged away 
gradually after death, instead of instantaneously at death, 
is the substance of the doctrine of purgatory. The Romish 



86 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



purgatory is the progressive sanctificatiori of a member 
of the Romish Church carried over into the intermediate 
state. If this theory is introduced into the Protestant 
Church, it will not stop here. For if regenerate but 
imperfectly sanctified men are to go on, between death 
and the resurrection, struggling with corruption, and get- 
ting rid of remaining sin, as they do here upon earth, it 
will be an easy and natural step to the kindred theory 
that the transition from sin to holiness may be made by 
unregenerate men also daring this same period. Those 
who adopt this latter error, object to the Confessional 
tenet of complete sanctification at death by the. immediate 
operation of the Holy Spirit that it is magical, mechanical, 
and unpsychological. It is incompatible, they assert, with 
the spiritual nature of the soul and its free agency. But 
it is no more so than the co-ordinate and cognate doctrine 
of the immediate operation of the Holy Spirit in regener- 
ation. The Holy Spirit instantaneously implants the new 
principle of divine life in the soul, when he " creates it 
anew in Christ Jesus," and "quickens it from its death in 
trespasses and sins." This lays the foundation, as we 
have observed for the whole process of salvation. From 
this instantaneous regeneration, there result conversion in 
its two acts of faith and repentance, justification, and pro- 
gressive sanctification up to the moment of death, when 
the same Divine Agent by the exercise of the same 
almighty energy by which he instantaneously began the 
work of salvation, instantaneously completes it. 1 Now, 
if the Holy Ghost works magically, mechanically, and 
contrary to the nature of the human soul in one case, he 
does in the other. If the completion of the work in the 
soul by an immediate act is liable to this charge, the be- 

1 For a fuller discussion of the subject, see the Author's Sermons to 
the Spiritual Man, pp. 317-325. 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



87 



ginning of it is also. Any one who holds the doctrine of 
instantaneous regeneration, is estopped from urging such 
an objection as this to the doctrine of complete sanctifica- 
tion at death. In all the operations of the third Person of 
the Trinity, be they instantaneous or be they gradual, he 
contradicts none of the laws and properties of the human 
mind, but works in the human will " to will," according 
to its nature and constitution. There is nothing magical, 
mechanical, or unpsychological in any of them. 

Another objection urged by the advocates of a future 
sanctification from sin is, that complete sanctiflcation at 
death puts all souls, infant and adult, on a dead level, 
destroying the distinction of grade between them. If at 
death all regenerate souls are made perfectly sinless and 
holy, it is said that they must be all alike in the 
scope and reach of their faculties. This does not follow. 
Complete sanctification at death frees the soul of a regen- 
erate infant from all remainders of the corruption in- 
herited from Adam, but does not convert it into an adult 
soul, any more than the complete sanctification of an or- 
dinary regenerate adult makes him equal in mental power 
to St. Paul or St. # Augustine. Complete sanctification at 
death frees the infant's soul, the child's soul, the youth's 
soul, the man's soul, from indwelling sin, but leaves each 
soul in the same class in which it finds it, and starts it on 
an endless expansion of its faculties and its holiness, and 
not upon a long, wearing struggle with remaining corrup- 
tion. In this way, " one star differeth from another star 
in glory," while all are equally and alike the pure and 
gleaming stars of heaven, not the " wandering stars " of 
sin and hell. 

Such, then, is the jperiod of time to which the regener- 
ating work of the Holy Spirit is confined. It is the life 
that now is, not the life that is to come; the present 



83 



THE PROPOSED REVISION OF 



limited seon, not the future unlimited seon. We proceed 
now to consider the second question, How wide and exten- 
sive is his agency during this period ? How many of the 
human family, have we reason from Scripture to hope 
and believe, he will regenerate here upon earth ? 

Before proceeding to answer this question, a prelimin- 
ary remark is to be made. It is utterly improbable that 
such a stupendous miracle as the incarnation, humilia- 
tion, passion, and crucifixion of one of the Persons of the 
Godhead, should yield a small and insignificant result; 
that this amazing mystery of mysteries, " which the angels 
desire to look into," and which involves such an immense 
personal sacrifice on the part of the Supreme Being, 
should have a lame and impotent conclusion. On a priori 
grounds, therefore, we have reason to conclude that the 
Gospel of the Cross will be successful, and the Christian 
religion a triumph on the earth and among the race of 
creatures for whom it was intended. But this can hardly 
be the case, if only a small fraction of the human family 
are saved. The presumption, consequently, is that the 
great majority of mankind, not the small minority of it, 
will be the subjects of redeeming grace. What, then, is 
the teaching of Revelation upon this subject? 

1. In the first place, we have ground for believing that 
all of mankind who die in infancy will be regenerated by 
the Holy Spirit. The proof of this is not so abundant as 
for some other doctrines, but it is sufficient for faith, (a) 
Scripture certainly teaches that the children of the regen- 
erate are " bound up in the bundle of life " with their 
parents. " The promise [of the Holy Spirit] is unto you 
and your children " (Acts 2 : 38, 39). " If the root be 
holy, so are the branches" (Rom. 11 : 16). " The unbe- 
lieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbe- 
lieving wife is sanctified by the husband ; else were your 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



89 



children unclean, but now they are holy " (1 Cor. 7 : 14). 
This is salvation by covenanted mercy, concerning which 
there is little dispute, (b) The salvation of infants out- 
side of the covenant, is plainly supported by the language 
of Christ respecting " little children " as a special class. 
" They brought unto him infants (fiptyrj), that he would 
touch them. . . . And he said, Suffer little children 
(Traihla) to come unto me, for of such is (tcov tolovtcov 
IcttIv) the kingdom of God " [i.e., the kingdom of God is 
composed of such] (Luke 18 : 15, 16). The Redeemer 
says this of infants as infants, and because they are in- 
fants, and consequently, of all infants. When he says, 
" Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is [of them 
is, avrcov eVrh>] the kingdom of heaven " (Matt. 5 : 3), 
he means that this kingdom belongs to them as poor in 
spirit, and because they are poor in spirit, and consequently 
belongs to all the poor in spirit. And similarly when lie 
says, " Suffer little children to come unto me, for of 
such is the kingdom of God," he means that this kingdom 
is composed of such considered as little children, and be- 
cause they are little children, and therefore is composed 
of all the little children. 1 No such declaration is made 
concerning the other classes of mankind. Infancy is the 
only age that is singled out, by which to prove a member- 
ship in the kingdom of God from the very age itself. 
Again, our Lord's declarations that " the angels of the lit- 
tle ones do always behold the face of my Father which is 
in heaven " (Matt. 18 : 10) ; and that it is " not the will 
of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little 
ones should perish " (Matt. IS : 14) ; betoken a special 
interest in this part of the human family. And in the 

1 It would be a forced interpretation to make this passage mean, 
"Suffer little children to come unto me, for of some of such is the 
kingdom of God." This would require Ik tw toiovtwv icrrlv. 



90 



THE PEOPOSED REVISION OF 



prophecy of Jonah, God mentions the existence of " six 
score thousand persons that cannot discern between their 
right hand and their left hand," as the reason for sparing 
Xineveh. With these teachings of Revelation concerning 
the salvation of infants, the Confession agrees. By posi- 
tive assertion, it declares, that there are " elect infants dy- 
ing in infancy ; n and by total silence concerning " non- 
elect infants dying in infancy " it implies that there are 
none. 

The Protestant Church understands the Bible to de- 
clare that all who die in infancy die regenerate. Probably 
all evangelical denominations, without committing them- 
selves to the statements of the Westminster Confession 
concerning " election," would be willing to say that all 
dying infants " are regenerated and saved by Christ 
through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and 
how he pleaseth " (Conf. x. 3). But this is the regenera- 
tion and salvation of one-half of the human family. This 
of itself pours over human existence a mild and cheering 
light. " Whom the gods love, die young," said the 
heathen, without any knowledge of God's compassion for 
man in his " dear Son." Much more, then, may the 
Christian under the irradiation of the gospel expect that 
the infinite mercy of God, by u the washing of regenera- 
tion and renewing of the Holy Ghost," will bring all the 
" little children " into holiness and heaven. The gloom 
of Virgil's description, 

' 1 Continue- audits voces, vagitus et ingens 
Infantumque animse flentes in limine primo," 

is changed into the brightness of that of the prophet, 
" The,sti:eets of the city shall be full of boys and girls 
playing in .the streets thereof" (Zech. 8: 10); and of the 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



91 



Redeemer's citation from the Psalms, " Out of the mouth 
of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise " (Matt. 
21 : 16). 

2. In the second place, the Scriptures and the Confes- 
sion teach the regeneration of a vast multitude, from Adam 
down, who come under the operation of the Holy Spirit 
in connection with the special revelation and the external 
means of grace, in the antediluvian, patriarchal, Jewish, 
and Christian Churches. 

3. In the third place, the Scriptures and the Confession 
teach that the Divine Spirit exerts his regenerating grace, 
to some extent, within adult heathendom, making use of 
conscience, or " the law written on the heart," as the 
means of convicting of sin preparatory to imparting the 
new divine life ; and that in the last day a part of God's 
elect " shall come from the east and from the west, and 
from the north and from the south, and shall sit down in 
the kingdom of God " (Luke 13 : 29). These are all re- 
generated in this life. And since regeneration in the in- 
stance of the adult immediately produces faith and repent- 
ance, a regenerate heathen is both a believer and a peni- 
tent. He feels sorrow for sin, and the need of mercy. 
This felt need of mercy and desire for it is potentially 
and virtually faith in the Redeemer. For although the 
Redeemer has not been presented to him historically and 
personally as the object of faith, yet the Divine Spirit by 
the new birth has wrought in him the sincere and longing 
disposition to believe in him. With the penitent and 
believing man in the gospel, he says, " Who is he, Lord, 
that I might believe on him?" (John 9 : 36). Such a 
man is "regenerated and saved by Christ through the 
Spirit," and belongs to that class of " elect persons who 
are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of 
the word " (Conf. x. 3). 



92 



THE PKOPOSED REVISION OF 



4. In the fourth place, in addition to all this work of 
the Holy Spirit in the past and present in applying in 
these three ways the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 
there is that mightiest and most wonderful manifestation 
of his power which is still in reserve for the future of 
Christendom. The Scriptures promise an outpouring in 
the "last days," that will far exceed in sweeping and irre- 
sistible energy anything in the past history of the Church. 
"I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh," says God 
(Joel 2 : 28). " It shall come to pass in the last days, 
that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established 
in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above 
the hills, and all nations shall flow unto it " (Isa. 2:2; 
Micah 4:1). A far more profound and all-reaching in- 
terest in the concerns of the soul and its eternal destiny 
than has ever been witnessed on earth, will mark the mil- 
lennium. The then near and impending advent of the 
Son of man, " when he shall come in his glory, and all 
the holy angels with him, and before him shall be gath- 
ered all nations" (Matt. 25: 31, 32), will weigh heavily 
upon mankind. The end of the world and the approach- 
ing judgment will be facts of infinite meaning. This hu- 
man life, now so frivolous, will become serious and awful. 

"The clouds that gather round the setting sun 
Do take a soher coloring from the eye 
That doth keep watch o'er man's mortality." 

Yast masses of sinful men will be bowed down in poig- 
nant conviction, and nations will be born in a day. The 
Redeemer, " travelling in the greatness of his strength," 
will take unto him his mighty power, and turn the human 
heart as the rivers of water. Such is the promise and the 
prophecy of Almighty God. 

Now this is a great salvation. "Where sin abounded, 



THE WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. 



93 



grace lias superabonnded " (Eom. 5 : 20). The immense 
majority of the race that fell in Adam will be saved in 
Christ, " by the washing of regeneration/' Though some 
men and angels will freely persist in depravity, and be left 
in their persistence, yet this minor and mournful note of 
discord will only enhance the choral harmony of the uni- 
verse. The wrath of man shall praise God (Ps. 76: 10). 
The duty of the Church is to preach to every creature the 
law by which men are convicted of sin, and the gosjoel by 
which it is pardoned and eradicated, praying unceasingly 
for the outpouring of the Holy Ghost, to make both law 
and gospel effectual to salvation. Instead of starting a 
false and delusive hope for the future redemption of a 
part of the human family, by daring to reconstruct God's 
plan of redemption and extending the dispensation of his 
Spirit into the next life, the Church should strengthen the 
old and true hope by doing with its might what its hands 
find to do, and crying with the evangelical prophet, 
" Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the Lord " 
(Isa. 51 : 9). 



"The most learned' and searching work, in its line that has 
appeared in this country within the present generation." 

— CHICAGO TRIBUNE. 

DOGMATIC THEOLOGY. 

By WILLIAM G. T. SHEDD, D.D., 

Professor of Systematic Theology in Union Theological Seminary. 



Second Edition, Two Volumes, 8vo, with Portrait, Price $7.00. 



" Dr. Shedd's theology is full of the word of God in its very essence, it is pervaded by 
the great thoughts of the master-minds of all the ages, and it is presented to us in a style 
remarkable for its purity and clearness. The student who masters these volumes will be 
well armed for controversy and well equipped for teaching." — New York Observer. 

"These volumes are, in more senses than one, weighty. They are full of matter. Dr. 
Shedd is master of a singularly clear, strong, and expressive style, and wastes no words. 
Ample as are his discussions, there is nothing superfluous. His full, yet choice diction, 
admirably sets forth his profound and well ordered thought.'' — IVatchman, Boston. 

"The two volumes are the result of eighteen years of speci 1 study, and of forty 
years labor in theological research. The treatment is such as might be expected of Dr. 
Shedd: scholarly, profound, devout, thorough." — New York Examiner. 

"As a whole, the work is the clearest and most exhaustive statement of dogmatic 
theology that has yet been made, and for that reason it is likely to attract as much atten- 
tion from scientists as from theologians." — Philadelphia Times. 

" The style never labors nor becomes obscure. The reader is never in doubt as to 
the meaning of the author. The work easily takes precedence among the various pres- 
entations of Puritan Calvinism, and will have a permanent value as an explanation ot 
that influential system of religious philosophy." — Andover Review. 

44 Dr. Shedd's great power is in the clearness and fulness and exactness of his doc- 
trinal statements, and in their illustration. He is a master of sentences. No one can 
doubt his meaning. These volumes are therefore eminently readable and many an 
earnest student will find strength and inspiration in reading them thoroughly from end 
to end." — Chicago Standard. 

44 Into these ample volumes, as into a reservoir, have flowed all the streams of Dr. 
Shedd's lifelong studies — literary, ethical, philosophical, exegetical, scientific, and theo- 
logical. It is delightful to think of the usefulness for generations of these volumes to 
ministers and students. To Dr. Shedd we extend out hearty thanks for this great 
work." — New York Evangelist. 

"There are two features of the work that specially aid in making it a fine text-book. 
In the first place, it is didactic rather than polemic. He states, expounds, and defends 
what he believes to be the true view and spends little time in expounding and opposing 
heresies. In the second place, the discussions are compact. The style is absolutely 
clear, and no subject that he undertakes to unfold is at all slighted, but there is no waste 
of words. We congratulate Dr. Shedd on the completion of this great work. We 
congratulate the readers of theology on their possession of it." — Rev. John DeWitt, in 
The Presbyterian Review. 

"The students of Dr. Charles Hodge will find it very profitable to put this work 
beside his. On some of the particulars of the Calvinistic or Augustinian, or Pauline 
system, the two differ. The contrast in the plan and working out and style of the two 
works is great. But they are the complements, each of the other. It will be an intel- 
lectual tonic to read the two together. We wish that every minister had them both." 

— Presbyterian Journal. 

" This vigorous, mature, and stately work is likely to become one of the standard 
authorities of scholarly orthodoxy. Its chief peculiarities are its solidity, scriptural- 
ness, and massive logical force. Professor Shedd is himself a master in theology, and 
he has reverence for masters in his own department.'' — Our Day. 



Dr. Shedcl's Works. 



" These volumes will take rank as they will naturally be compared with, the ency- 
clopaedic treatise of Dr. Charles Hodge, and they will stand well this severe test. Less 
full and exhaustive in the citation of authorities and the discussion of opposing views, its 
positive and constructive features are equally strong. In one feature Dr. Shedd's 
treatment of theological questions will be more satisfactory to many minds than Dr. 
Hodge's, and that is, the wider scope and office he accords to the reason, in the formula- 
tion and defence of doctrines. He writes from the postulate that while the reason may 
not independently discover the dogmas of revealed religion, and a revelation is necessary, 
yet a true dogma, when revealed, will be so accordant with reason, that its aid may and 
must be invoked for its understanding and confirmation." — Christian Intelligencer. 



DR. SHEDD'S OTHER WORKS. 



^ HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN 

DOCTRINE. Two vols., crown 8vo. 
Seventh edition, cloth, $5.00. 

HOMILETICS AND PASTORAL 

THEOLOGY. One vol., crown 8vo. 
Seventh edition, cloth, $ 2.50. 

A CONCISE ANALYTICAL COM- 
MENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S EPIS- 
TLE TO THE ROMANS. One vol., 
crown 8vo, cloth, $2.50. 

SERMONS TO THE SPIRITUAL 

MAN. One vol., crown 8vo., cloth, 
$2.50. 



SERMONS TO THE NATURAL 

MAN. One vol., crown 8vo. Third 
edition, cloth, $2.50. 

THEOLOGICAL ESSAYS. One vol., 

8vo. Enlarged and carefully revised 
edition, cloth, $2.50. 

LITERARY ESSAYS. A series that 
relate principally to ./Esthetics and Lit- 
erature. With portrait. One vol., 
crown, 8vo, cloth, $2.50. 

THE DOCTRINE OF ENDLESS 

-PUNISHMENT. One vol., crown 
8vo., $1.50. 



SERMONS TO THE SPIRITUAL MAN. 



* The thought which they express is not only profound and well wrought out, 
but it has a certain grip on the mind which insures more than a temporary influence 
however strong that may be."—Congregationalist, Boston. 

"All are nobly written. All contain passages which could have been produced 
by no one but a master of style. Most of them are truly eloquent, and their eloquence 
is of the highest type."— Presbyterian, Pa. 

" The last two discourses, entitled " Every Christian a Debtor to the Pagan," 
and " The Certain Success of Evangelistic Labor," place the duty of the world's 
Christianization upon its broad Scriptural foundations, and set forth the reasons for 
its progressive and ultimate triumphs with inspiring eloquence."— Christian Intelli- 
gencer, New York. 

" To all minds awake and in earnest touching spiritual things, we can unre- 
servedly commend this volume. It will be sure to aid in the struggle against sin, and 
in victory over it.^—New York Evangelist. 

. " The sermons are peculiarly adapted for reading, and they are among the most 
spiritual and thoughtful discourses that have been published in recent years."— 

Wesley an Christian Advocate. 



Dr. She eld's Works. 



"Dr. Shedd's sermons command respect from the intellectual ability of theit 
HUthor. They are interesting exhibitions of the way in which a modern Calvinist, 
Jvho holds with great tenacity to the Augustinian theology, views divine progress in 
its relation to human character and destiny. The new departure has not yet invaded 
Dr. Shedd's mind to any extent. Consequently, to a progressive Christian thinker, 
\he premises of most of his discourses are unacceptable." — Christian Register^ 
Boston. 

" They are distinguished by a clear and luminous style, and the boldness and 
trigor which comes from profound conviction. No better volume of sermons, none 
more thoughtful, spiritual, or satisfying, has come from the press for a long time."-" 
Christian at Work, New York. 

" We commend these sermons to our readers ; for though, as a Presbyterian divine p 
We could not endorse all his views, yet, upon the great essential doctrines and duties 
of Christianity, we are much at one with him." — Churchman, New York. 



A HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. 



,l Dr. Shedd has furnished an important contribution to the study of church his- 
tory. To have made a readable book — a book which must interest the general scholar 
as well as the professed theologian — on a topic so difficult and so remote from the 
ordinary interests and literary currents of the time, is itself a rare and very great 
merit, demanding graceful recognition from all the scholars of the land." — North 
A nter ic an Review. 

"It is many years since a more valuable contribution has been made, in this 
country or England, to theological literature ; one the study of which will yield riper 
fruits of Christian knowledge. These volumes are marked by a thoroughness of 
knowledge and clearness of statement, as well as by a certain vital element which 
pervades them, and which shows the love of the author for his great theme, and that 
he takes his position, not without but within his subject, and so relates the transfor- 
mations and developments of religious thought as if he had himself passed through 
them." — Bibliotheca Sacra. 

"We hold that this is the most important contribution that has been made to our 
theological literature during the present age." — Presbyterian Standard. 

" In our judgment, no production of greater moment has been given to the public 
for a long time." — Princeton Review. 

"A body of theological history which is in form as perfect as it is in substance 
excellent." — N. Y. Evening Post. 

" It well deserves an honorable and permanent place in the standard literature of 
theology." — New Engiander. 

"A rich addition to our theological literature." — American Theological Review. 

"Dr. Shedd's History of Christian Doctrine, on its first appearance, was unani= 
mously recognized as filling with remarkable success a blank that had existed in our 
English literature on this important subject, and it still holds the foremost place in 
works of this class." — Edinbitrgh Daily Review. 



HOMILETICS AND PASTORAL THEOLOGY. 



"The work will be found to be an admirable guide and stimulus in whatever per-, 
tains to this department of theology. The student finds himself in the hands of a 
master able to quicken and enlarge his scope and spirit. The homiletical precepts 
are well illustrated by the author's own style, which is muscular, while quivering 
with nervous life. Nowadays one rarely reads such good English writing — elevated 
and clear, sinewy and flexible, transparent for the thought. Each topic is handled 
in a true progressive method. Our young ministers may well make a study of this 
book." — American Theol. Review. 



Br. ShedcVs Works. 



"We have read this book with almost unqualified approval. We cannot but regard 
« as, on the whole, the very best production of the kind with which we are acquainted 
Fhe topics discussed are of the first importance to every minister of Christ engaged is 
active service, and their discussion is conducted by earnestness as well as ability, and in 
a style which for clear, vigorous, and unexceptionable English, is itself a model." — N. V 
Evangelist. 

"The ablest book on the subject which the generation has produced," — Christian 
(nielligencer. 

"Dr. Shedd's Homiletics and Pastoral Theology has everywhere been welcomed 
as a sagacious and valuable contribution to the equipment of our rising preachers '' 
Edinburgh Daily Review. 

SERMONS TO THE NATURAL MAN. 

" These Sermons are an excellent course upon the theology of the law. Dr. Shedd 
.8 one of the best known in this country of American theologians, and those who ara 
acquainted v/ith his writings do not require to be told that he carries out his ideas with 
perspicuity, force, and conclusive completeness."— Edinburgh Daily Review. 

"The reader, whether he assent to the deductions of the author or not, must admit 
that they are enforced with logical conciseness, a rare wealth of learning, and an uncom- 
mon ability of argumentation." — N. Y. Evening Post. 

" Wc commend this volume to all who love the 'strong meat' of christian truth. 
*r.i who rejoice in the adaptation of the power of the gospel to the deepest needs of the 
'natural man.' " — Nafl Baptist, Phila. 

"The author has given us a collection of clear, logical, earnest discourses, well 
adapted to the spirit of the times. We specially commend the work to preachers of the 
gospel." —Methodist Protestant, Baltimore. 

"These sermons are clear in thought, the ntyle is lucid and simp.e, and free from 
the much-worn phrases of the pulpit. The arguments of the author are well arranged and 
put with great force." — Christian Union. 

THEOLOGICAL ESSAYS. 

"These Essay* bear traces on every page, not only of a mind disciplined to cloi_ 
thinking, and at home in the abstractions of philosophy and theology, but versed in the 
noblest works of literature, and equally able to appreciate the creations of art and imagi 
nation. The terseness and vigor of the style are well mated to the character of the 
thought," — New Englander. 

"These Essays are all marked by profound thought and perspicuity of sentiment 
The author has achieved a high reputation for the union of philosophic insight with genu- 
ine scholarship ; of depth and clearness of thought with force and elegance of style ; 
and for profound views of sin and grace, cherished not merely on theoretical, but still 
more on moral and experimental grounds." — Pri7iceton Review. 

"The Essay upon Evolution, is an extraordinary specimen of the metaphysical 
treatise, and the charm of its rhetoric is not less noticeable Prof. Shedd never puts his 
creed under a bushel ; but there are few students of any sect or class that will not derive 
great assistance from his labors." — Universalist Quarterly. 

" The tendency of this volume is to encourage doctrinal investigation and doctrinal 
preaching ; to stimulate clergymen to improve their methods of study, and to quicken 
their love of inquiry into the profoundest truths of religion." — Bibliotheca Sacra. 

"These Essays abound in strong thought, firmly and clearly expressed, and in this 
the reader of a different school cf theology will take a pleasure, while he may dissent 
from the theory propounded." — Methodist Quarterly. 

"A book equally remarkable for profound thought and for dogmatic severity 
Perhaps no stronger work has gone forth of late from any American theologian, nor anj 
work which at the same time runs so wholly in the face of the present drift of religious 
tentiment and scientific study." — New York Times. 

"The Genevan reformer has probably no abler or more devoted follower, at the 
present day than the author of these essays. In the circle of his readers he will find 
kiany who regard the study of his writings as an admirable exercise, for the vigyr of 
their statements, the closeness of their logic, and the athletic grasp of their conclusions, 
although their own convictions are not represented in his system of tteology." — Nt*» 
York Tribune. 

"Dr. Shedd's weighty and forceful rhetoric has been the admiration and despa.ii 
of most of his readers. To weight and force, we must add one other quality which dis- 
tinguishes it. namely, fervor. Every theological student and every minister shouW 
aoseess, and should not only read, bur Ptudy this volume."- The Presbyterian 



Dr. Shedd's Works. 



COMMENTARY ON ROMANS. 

" No better discipline could be suggested to a young minister than a patient and faith- 
ful study of a volume like this .... not only because it is the freshest, but 
because it is so purely intellectual and spiritual, wasting no time upon side issues, but 
grappling manfully with the highest and most recondite themes." — Christian Intelli 
^encer. 

" We know of no commentary by any living author on this epistle that, in our esti 
mation, deserves to be esteemed above it." — Hartford Religious Herald. 

"To the thorough learning of an accomplished scholar, it adds a style of special 
grace, luminous without superficiality, and, sparkling without levity." — Lutheran Mis- 
sionary. 

"We consider this volume to be indispensable to a theological library." — Richmond 
Central Presbyterian. 

"We have been instructed, interested, and edified as we have turned over his 
pages, and while not agreeing with him in all particulars, we have always been com- 
pelled by him to revise our views, and give a reason for our preference." — Christian at 
Work. 

"The commentary is brief; there is no verbiage, no amplification, no preaching ; it 
is as clear as crystal." — Illustrated Christian Weekly. 

"We like thoroughly the keenly critical scholarship of Dr. Shedd's book and the 

vigor of his style We commend the work as an excellent stimulus, and a 

great help in doctrinal study." — Congregatio?ialist. 

" Like the previous writings of Professor Shedd, this learned and scholarly volume 
is remarkable for the acute insight with which it applies profound philosophical principles 
to the elucidation of religious doctrine." — N. Y. Tribune. 



LITERARY ESS AYS. 

" His productions are never of an ephemeral character ; though often separated by 
a wide interval of years, they possess the unity which grows out of thoroughness of 
examination and earnestness of conviction ; powerful in argument, lucid in exposition, 
and effective in style, they challenge the interest of many readers who are unable to 
assent to their cor. elusions." — N. Y. Tribune. 

" Here is something deserving a permanent place in the realm of reading 

We wish to notice especially, commending it at the same time to the careful study of 
every one, the essay on ' The Influence and Method of English Studies.' .... We 
can, without hesitation, say, that it is one of the most profound, and thoughtful, and 
scholarly productions on this subject that we have ever read." — The Churchman. 

"The essays, one and all, are worthy of the Professor's pen. They reveal extensive 
reading, culture of a high order, and sympathy with all that is true and beautiful and 
good in nature, in life, and in art." — N. Y. Scotsma?i. 

"They bear the marks of the author's scholarship, dignity, and polish of style, and 
profound and severe convictions of truth and righteousness as the basis of culture as 
well as character." — Chicago Interior. 

"The severe and chastened beauty of his style is a fit vehicle for the lofty truths among 
which his mind ranges, and which he here announces and defends."— Presbyterian. 

"Dr. Shedd deals with themes not of pa<sing_but of enduring importance, ami his 
productions on these subjects, being tho-e of a wide reader and profound thinker, will 
always be valuable." — Christian at Work. 



For sale by all booksellers, or sent, post-paid, upon receipt of 
irice, by 

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers, 

743 and 745 Broadway, New York 



THE 

PROPOSED REVISION 

OP THE 

WESTMINSTER STANDARDS 



BY 

WILLIAM G. T. SHEDD, D.D. 



NEW YORK 
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 
1890 



SECOND EDITION, ENLARGED 



CREED REVISION 



In the Presbyterian Churches. By Philip Schaff, 
D.D. i2mo, paper, 50 cents, net. 

Dr. Schaff is in favor of revision. The world, he says, is 
moving, and the church cannot stand still. His pamphlet, 
which contains his views in full, has two divisions, one general 
in character and the other considering the subject from his- 
torical, doctrinal, and practical points of view. Several 
important documents bearing on revision are appended. 

" Dr. Schaff favors revision, but he treats the subject in 
excellent temper, counseling consensus in essentials, liberty in 
non-essentials, and charity in all things. His essay is an 
important contribution to the pending discussion." 

— Philadelphia Times. 

"Dr. Schaff is a stanch advocate of the proposed revision, 
and his whole pamphlet is full of the vigor, catholicity, and 
interest which the author's productions always illustrate. It 
must have a powerful influence." — Congregationalist. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY. 



A Lecture Delivered at the Opening of the Term 
of the Union Theological Seminary, New York, 
September 19, 1889. With an Appendix. By 
Charles Augustus Briggs, D.D. i2mo, 
pamphlet, 30 cents, net. 

"His scholarship, devoutness of spirit, and evident regard 
for truth render him one of the best interpreters of the 
modern school of thought on Biblical subjects." 

— Ba Itimore Methodist. 



WHITHER? O WHITHER? 

TELL ME WHERE. 

By James McCosh, Litt.D., LL.D., D.D. i2mo, 
paper, 50 cents, net. 

Dr. McCosh's pamphlet is a spirited consideration of 
some of the questions raised by Dr. Briggs's "Whither?" 
rather than a review of or an answer to it. His views 
touch upon many of the vital points in the present 
theological agitation, and are sure to attract wide attention. 



WHITHER ? 

A THEOLOGICAL QUESTION FOR THE TIMES. 

By CHARLES AUGUSTUS BRIGGS, D.D., 

Professor in the Union Theological Seminary, New York City. 

1 VOLUME, CBOWN 8vo. PEICE, $1.75. 

contents. 

Drifting — Orthodoxy —Mistaken Attitudes— Change of 
Base — Excesses — Failures — Departures— Perplexities 
—Progress in Theology— Christian Union. 

Dr. Briggs' book is bold, radical, almost startling. It is the product 
of more than twenty years of study in the history of Puritan theology 
and especially of the authors of the Westminster Standards. The work 
is written and published in view of the agitation in the Presbyterian 
Church regarding the revision of the Confession of Faith, and presents 
facts and arguments which every one interested in this question must 
heed. The work, however, has a far wider scope. The author's main 
contention is that all Christian denominations have drifted from their 
moorings. "The process of dissolution," he says, "has gone on long 
enough. The time has come for the reconstruction of theology, of 
polity, of worship, and of Christian life and work. The drift in the 
Church ought to stop. The barriers between the Protestant denomina- 
tions should be removed and an organic union formed. An Alliance 
should be made between Protestantism and Romanism and all other 
branches of Christendom." 

" The book comes to us fulfilling all anticipations. Interesting as a 
novel, almost elegant in its language, clear in its expression, marvel- 
lous in showing research, the book will pay largely for its reading." — 
The Christian Inquirer. 

"A work that should be read by all who are interested in religious 
discussions. Dr. Briggs' researches have been pursued in a catholic 
spirit, and the result of his labors should have a place in every theolog- 
ical library." — Boston Saturday Evening Gazette. 

"It is a remarkable work and is sure to receive attention." — The 
Nation. 

SUPPLIED TO CLERGYMEN AT SPECIAL NET RATES. 

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers, 

743-745 Broadway, New York. 



C 1 4 1 8 p 




Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
\* 4 • • * Treatment Date: June 2006 



^ £ /<§§tak \p « PreservationTechnologies 

V* (y A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

ACL 



r o V 




1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-2111 



